If You Expect the Egyptian Press to Be An Educational Vehicle, You Shall Be Disappointed

The opinion-makers in most of the Egyptian press have opinions.  But they lack the ability in how to make them.  Their topics are important to the Egyptians and other readers.  However their writings do not have the backing of evidence, objective analysis, or measured quotations from statistics and expert opinion.  Their launches are promising, but the launched essay, if you call it that, quickly disintegrate into guess-work, non-supported expectations, and reliance on either personal attacks or praise.  That press seems to function on the premise that words have the capacity to prove the truth of their own assertions.

Examples abound.

• In "Al-Massrioun" newspaper, with its Islamist orientation, we read a non-substantiated attack by its Chief Editor, Gamal Sultan, on the transitional Government whose Prime Minister is the economist Hazem Al-Biblawi.  The topic is of national importance as it deals with the development of the Suez Canal Zone.  The Prime Minister had gone to that strategic zone to launch a national scheme.

But Gamal Sultan objects.  His reasoning is that: "How can a transitional Government have the audacity of launching such a vital project which shall impact the country's economy at least till the year 2040?" He takes the term of "transitional Government" as an inert mechanism sitting in a parking lot without the right to take actions promoting the country's economy or security.  That Editor-in-Chief does not realize that the term "transitional" is applicable to a government which has come to power pending the adoption of constituent instruments (e.g. the Constitution) which bestow durability.

• In Al-Ahram newspaper, the official mouthpiece of the Government, Makram Muhammad Ahmed, a veteran writer in that newspaper, writes about the Nile water issue between Egypt, the Sudan and Ethiopia.

Negotiations with Ethiopia regarding the construction of the Ethiopian dam called "Al-Nahda" have run into difficulties.  Egypt, afraid of the dam's effect on its intake from the Nile waters, is standing by its water quota determined in a 1929 treaty.  This is although that treaty was concluded prior to Ethiopian exercise of its independence and its developmental needs for a bigger share of those life-giving waters.

Makram Muhammad Ahmed looks upon the present failure of those negotiations as a casus belli (reason for war between Egypt and Ethiopia).  Acting as a mind reader, he justifies such radical measures for which Egypt is unprepared, on: "Ethiopia's prevarication has now reached its ultimate limit.  This should force Egypt to be ready for other alternatives to protect its national interests."

• In the same daily of Al-Ahram, another opinion-maker by the name of Morsi Attallah creates an out of sight reason for the popularity of General El-Sisi whose popularity does not need Attallah non-reasoning.  The writer attributes El-Sisi's high standing in the minds of millions of Egyptians to the problems faced by Turkey's Prime Minister, Ordoghan.  But every myth needs a few grains of sand of facts to build something on their shaky base.

It is true that Ordoghan has interfered in Egypt's internal affairs by siding with the Muslim Brotherhood when it was kicked out of its power perch on July 3.  But coincidentally he was also facing a sharp downturn in his popularity on the Turkish street.  But there is absolutely no cause and effect between what is happening on the Turkish street and the events on the Egyptian street.  The bridge which Attallah builds between Ankara and Cairo is constructed from the writer's own mental girders.

 Two quotations from his pipe-dream would suffice: (1) "The book of instructions used by the Turkish party of "Justice and Development" is the same book which instructs the Muslim Brotherhood's party of "Freedom and Justice." (2) "In Egypt, the public adores Field Marshal El-Sisi while in Turkey, the anti-Ordoghan demonstrations raise the pictures of El-Sisi aloft."  I hope that Attallah realizes that Cairo, after July 3, in reprisal against Ordoghan's interventionism recalled its Ambassador from Ankara.  And El-Sisi has enough ascertainable popularity that I doubt it than he needs Attallah's imaginary boost.

• On the issue of the Government's response to the Muslim Brotherhood's declaration of resistance to the law regulating public demonstrations:

An Islamist leader and writer in the newspaper "Al-Watan," by the name of Dr. Nageh Ibrahim declares the following: "The Government has manifested total incomprehension of politics, wisdom, and aforethought...The conflict with the Brotherhood began as a small matter, but became bigger.  That conflict could have been avoided had the disbanding of the sit-in at Rabaa been done with more sagacity and professionalism."

How detached from reality could Dr. Nageh Ibrahim get?  And how much obfuscation of the realities of August 14, 2013 on which the army and the police broke up that sit-in?  For six weeks, from July 3 to August 14, the authorities have pleaded with those Islamist insurrectionists to leave peacefully.

 Evidence shows that that sit-in, like others of its type, has turned in trench warfare in the heart of the Egyptian capital.  Arms were smuggled; snipers were posted; declarations of support for terrorism in Sinai were made; and acts of torture were committed.  The road to democracy should be safeguarded by stability, participation in the political process, and respect for the Rule of Law.  This is the broad framework by which the term "legitimate opposition" can be defined.  Lawlessness does not confer on its practitioner the badge of honorable opposition.

• On the U.S. role in the unseating of former President Morsi: A writer in the newspaper "Al-Shaab," by the name of Magdi Qarqar of the "Labor" party, asserts that: "The military coup of July 3 was supported by the CIA.  We all know that and we know who is in daily contact with the U.S. administration and its intelligence institutions." Incredible!!

The writer seems to be more busy reflecting his pure fantasies through writing than having the capacity to simply read, in order to get a hold on well-known facts.  Mr. Qarqar (the name is also the sound of inhaling on a water pipe or shisha) must know that: (a) the U.S. imposed some sanctions on Egypt following the ouster of Morsi; (b) the millions who rose up on June 30 demanding an end to the Brotherhood's hijacking of the Revolution of January 25 attributed those U.S. sanctions to an American tilt towards the Brotherhood; and (c) Secretary of State Kerry visited Egypt after July 3 on his way to Saudi Arabia to advocate a "go easy" policy on the Muslim Brotherhood.

• On admission that no-evidence exists to back up the assertions of another editorialist.

In the newspaper "Al-Shorooq" we finally discover that the maximum of the level of honesty in reporting exists only in the admission of "although I have no evidence."  That writer is Mahmoud Al-Kardousi who claims that "the activists who ignited the January 25 Revolution are "an essential factor in all the scenes of chaos and destruction which followed."  He backs this up by declaring: "Of course I have no evidence!!"  Well!! If you have no evidence.  Why don't you just shut up?

It is truly amazing that in the midst of the Brotherhood's acts of defiance of the presidency of Adly Mansour, there exists no elucidation in the Egyptian Press of what constitutes recognition of governments.  Those who are for it, praise it in general terms, and those who are opposed to it denounce it also in general terms.  Not one iota of public enlightenment for any cause, through the use of credible information, logic, analysis, examples or history.  Nearly everything is blah blah blah.

As a concrete example, there is no word on the general parameters for recognition of governments.  There is no education on the concepts of control, acceptance by the general public, or on the ability of the government to comply with international agreements and standards.  This is the tripod of the 3 Cs (control, consent and conduct).  Sad!!

What is the moral of all the above?  It is that a good part of the Egyptian press has nothing to contribute to public enlightenment.  Absolutely nothing!!