The Cairo Buzz About the Future Prez

By the end of May 24, 2012, Egypt would have chosen, for the first time in its 10,000 years of recorded history, its future President.  That historic person could be one of thirteen personalities, each with an electoral symbol.  These symbols help guide the nearly 53 million electorate in making that unprecedented choice.  There are no elephants among the symbols (elephants inhabit the great Cairo Zoo), nor are there donkeys (in the Arab culture calling someone "a donkey" means "very stupid.")

The symbols for the front runners are "the horse," for Abdel-Moneim Aboul Fotouh (former member of the Muslim Brotherhood); "the sun," for Amr Moussa  (former foreign minister under Mubarak); "the scales," meaning justice, for Muhammed Morsi (candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood); and "the falcon," for Hamdain Sabbahi (secular Nasserite).  There is little doubt that as of July 1, 2012, the coup perpetrated by Nasser on July 23, 1952, would officially come to an end.

Like in every electoral campaign, electioneering is waged by rallies, debates, demonstrations, TV interviews, songs, jokes, and the flow of money.

The Cairo buzz has been focused on the televised debate between Aboul Fotouh (60 years old) and Moussa (75 years old); the former was jailed for a total of 6 years during the Mubarak regime, the latter served Mubarak and his regime in various capacities for many years.

Being the first such debates in the history of the Arab world, the whole region watched that lively spectacle.  Aboul Fotouh was attacked by Moussa for having been an Ikhwani (a member of the Muslim Brotherhood); Moussa was hit back for having voted for Mubarak's continuation in office in the fraudulent elections of 2010.  Aboul Fotouh retorted by saying "But I was expelled by the Brotherhood for my moderate stances," and Moussa tried to downplay the stigma of voting in support of a dictator by saying: "At that time, the choice was between Mubarak or a worse alternative -Mubarak's son Gamal."

In his 80 page political manifesto, Moussa presents his priorities as would-be President: end of the emergency laws which have lasted since 1954; elimination of illiteracy; acceleration of development; and the attraction of foreign investments.

Aboul Fotouh's focus is on "the average Egyptian citizen, whether Muslim or Christian (Copt); Islamic jurisprudence; rebuilding of a strong Egypt with strong armed forces; and increased funding for public education and public health."  The pillars of his platform (he is a Physician) are the safeguarding of the Revolution of January 25, 2011, and the observance of "whatever is good for society as a whole," including the right of a Copt or a woman to run in the future for the post of president of Egypt.

Throughout this presidential campaign which is fast heating, the political jokes are mobilized.  Dr. Muhammad Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood is called "the spare tyre."  The reason is that when the Brotherhood feared that its chosen candidate, Khairat El-Shater, might be disqualified (for serving a jail sentence of a long duration during the Mubarak regime, they nominated Morsi as an alternative.

Another candidate, General Ahmed Shafeeq, was called "the candy candidate."  He had promised to distribute lots of candy to the Tahrir Square demonstrators.  And Moussa who declared his candidacy in the midst of a dilapidated section of Cairo to show his determination to abolish poverty, was called "the cigar candidate."  Unfortunately for him, he was photographed in the midst of poverty smoking an expensive cigar.

From "the spare tyre," to "the candy candidate," to "the cigar candidate," to ten other candidates, the Cairo Buzz regarding the future Prez makes for a great reality show whose outcome shall define the outcome of the Arab Spring in this pivotal Arab country - Egypt.

A Heap of Brotherly Confusion

In Cairo, the underground (the Metro) runs perfectly well.  Clean, on time, cheap, non-congested.  At the Suez Canal, the southbound and the northbound, between Port Said on the Mediterranean (north) and Suez on the Gulf of Suez (south) runs as a Swiss watch.  If these events happen in Egypt as symbols of modernity and connectivity, why does not the revolutionary aftermath run similarly smoothly?

The answer lies in a beautiful quote from National Geographic in a recent incisive article headlined “Egypt in the Moment.”  It goes like this: “Before, there was no dialogue about the future.  Now there is one.”  Herein lies the brotherly confusion.  For the dialogue raised basic questions whose answers lie dormant in the minds of those who toppled Mubarak, as well as of those who rode the crest of the revolutionary success at no cost or at a little cost to themselves.  The former group fragmented; the latter group split in caucuses each claiming to be “the guardians of the revolution.”

Here we begin with the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (the SCAF).  With no government in place on February 11, 2011, when Mubarak was pushed out of power, the SCAF assumed or was invited to assume power over demographically big and culturally diverse Egypt.  Field Marshall Tantawi, from his office at the Ministry of Defense in Abbasiyah, Cairo, became the de facto Head of State.  In effect, the SCAF protected the revolution at birth, then, as a unique midwife, took over the role of a stern mother.  Tantawi is the face of official Egypt and also its substance.

That role was truly beneficial.  It saved Egypt from the calamitous predicament of Syria where civil war is raging in spite of Kofi Annan’s understated descriptions.  It also provoked endless series of demonstrations in many Tahrir Squares all over Egypt.  While in Libya, where the country is bathed in competing city-state militias, Egypt is bathed in competing ideologies, Islamists and secular, and in all kinds of squabbles by professional syndicates and labor unions.  All of these forces are demanding instant political and economic solution and benefits.

How about the signal success of holding those fair Parliamentary elections in which a whopping 67% of the electorate, men and women, participated?  Here lies the SCAF’s boast of its good intentions of moving a complex Egypt toward the promised land of democracy and development.  To the anti-SCAF forces which want to force their way, in despite the structures of the provisional constitutional scheme promulgated under Mubarak, the SCAF says: we protected you from our guns; we shall leave on June 30 of this year; our role in protecting Egypt from chaos, after a civilian president is elected this May and a new constitution is drafted and approved in a plebiscite, must continue.

Both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis (no coalition between the two is possible because the Salafis adhere to a literal and unworkable interpretation of the role of Sharia in governance) hold 70% of parliamentary seats.  But the weight of secularism in and out of Parliament is crushing the Brotherhood's old motto of “Islam is the Solution.”

The Islamists demand of an ouster of the Ganzouri Cabinet of technocrats has been rebuffed by the SCAF and by the secular parties and parliamentarians.  The Brotherhood’s initial selection of a would-be presidential candidate, Khairat El-Shater, and the Salafi’s selection for the same role of Hazem Salah Abu-Ismail were aborted under applicable legal rules.  El-Shater had served time in jail under Mubarak’s rule; Abu-Ismail’s mother was an American citizen, a disqualifier under the rules of that bygone era.  In fact, the SCAF bared its teeth by putting down a rowdy demonstration by the Salafis who besieged the Defense Ministry in Abbasiyah in a failed attempt to get their candidate un-disqualified.  The SCAF said: “How can an Egyptian attack his/her own Defense Ministry?  We are acting on the basis of court decisions, not on the basis of a desire to stay over beyond June 30, 2012.”  The majority of the populace seems to join the SCAF in support of this argument.

Within a few days from now, and definitely before the end of this May, a new President of Egypt will emerge in spite of the heap of brotherly confusion.  The three leading candidates are: Amr Mousa, a secularist; Abdel-Moneim Abu-ElFotouh, formerly one of the brain-trusts of the Muslim Brotherhood; Muhammad Morsi, now the formal candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood; and Hamdain Sabbahi, a Nasserite.

The role of the judiciary has been decisive.  Thirteen-thousand judges shall oversee the fairness of that fierce competition for the highest office in Egypt.  Fifty-two million Egyptians have the right to vote at twelve-thousand polling stations.  Campaign financing is limited to ten-million Egyptian pounds ($1.7 million approximately).  Under the leadership of Judge Farouk Sultan, who presides over the Supreme Commission for Presidential Elections, the presidential race is predicted to be fair.  It shall also be protected by massive security forces backed up by the SCAF.

By the end of June, the heap of brotherly confusion is expected to gradually evaporate.  It shall then be the time for the mighty River Nile to swell in its annual flood season.  Then the voice of the late Um Kalthoum, that departed great lady of the Arab song shall ring out again in praise of that mighty river in these words: 

“If it was not for the Nile, neither Egypt nor the Sudan would have found their place in human history.”

Egypt to the Salafis: "YOUR MOMMA!!"

When Mubarak was in power, he feared the counter power of the Muslim Brotherhood.  In response to this fear, he, prior to the January 25, 2011, followed the path of his original mentors, Nasser and Sadat.  Those military dictators who had shackled Egypt for 60 years had a recipe: fight the Islamists by other Islamists.  The Mubarak weapon was pre-ordained: fight the Brotherhood by an extremist Islamic movement called the Salafis.

The term “Salafi” in Arabic means “the return to the age of their co-religionist ancestors, the Islamists of the 7^th Century A.D.”  That return to the Islamic governance of nearly 1980 years ago is ideologically and practically flawed.  Islam of the age of the Prophet Muhammad and his four successors (Khalifas) was democratic (based on Shura-consultation).  It was based on women integration in decision-making and in other public life aspects.  It was also based on treating non-Muslims as equal in rights and obligations (“Lahom Ma Lana wa Alaihom Ma Alaine” – Arabic for: They have the same rights and obligations as us Muslims).  It was respectful of art and culture. 

How far removed are the present-day Salafis from this formula of what Islamic Law (Sharia) is all about?!  Very far to the point of being unrecognizable.  Long beards and long worry beads are characteristic of the Salafis in Egypt of today.  In their utterances and practices, they made Islam unrecognizable except for rituals.  But Islam is defined, not in the solitary context of rituals.  It is defined by the way you treat others, especially the others who happen to be non-Muslims.

The Mubarak Salafi creation, with its base in Alexandria, burst into the open only after the original revolutionaries, gathered by the millions in Tahrir Square and similar squares all over Egypt, got rid of Mubarak.  The Salafis felt that it was time to harvest the fruits from the trees of freedoms which they did not plant.

The result has been the establishment of a political party called “Al-Noor” (The Light) which gained 20% of seats in the new Parliament.  Those elections were fair and free, and the anti-Salafi forces accepted those results.  No problem.  Now emerges a problem for the Salafis who, in effect, look for guidance not within cosmopolitan Egypt.  They look for it from across the Red Sea – the wabbi police practices of the Arabian Peninsula which at times parallel the extreme Taliban ideology in Afghanistan.

The problem is that the Salafi leader, Hazem Salah Abu-Ismail, wishes to run for the highest post in Egypt in the forthcoming May elections.  He was disqualified by the Supreme Elections Commission under laws enacted during the Mubarak regime.  These enactments stipulated that an Egyptian presidential candidate must be an Egyptian citizen who neither he/she, nor his parents have ever carried a non-Egyptian passport.  Abu-Ismail’s Momma, who had passed away, was found to have been an American citizen who in fact had been registered to vote in US elections.  Trouble in paradise for Abu-Ismail and his Salafi movement!!

That disqualification was not the only one.  It parallels other disqualifications affecting other would-be candidates including Omar Soliman, the former spy-in-chief for Mubarak, and Khairat El-Shater of the Muslim Brotherhood for having served time in jail for political reasons.

Yet the Salafis would not let well enough alone.  Reared on the conspiracy theory, and trusting in their throaty numbers, they attempted to besiege the Defense Ministry, where the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (the SCAF) has its headquarters.  In very late April, in Cairo, the Salafis rumbled and their adversaries counter-rumbled.  The Salafis lost and Abu-Ismail’s hopes for the Egyptian presidency evaporated.

Who are the counter-Salafis?  Nearly everybody else, including the Muslim Brotherhood whose public stance is decidedly more moderate.  In this, the Brotherhood, especially the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), is joined by the General Union of Artistic Syndicates (Cinema, Drama and Music) which is assisting the FJP in the quest of Abdel-Monim Abu-Elfoteuh for the presidency.

These anti-Salafi forces have resorted to public demonstrations at the Headquarters of the Court of Cassassian (Naqd) in Cairo (where this blogger conducted hearings five years ago regarding compensation for the estates of the victims of the Egyptair crash of 1999).

Other anti-Salafi responses are taking place in Egypt’s public squares and in the secular media.  Among those direct and indirect responses are:

• Demonstration against Saudi authorities before the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Cairo for having arrested in Jedda an Egyptian activist, Lawyer Ahmed Al-Gizawi, for insulting Saudi Authorities while in Egypt; the Saudi Ambassador to Egypt was recalled by his Government;
• The present efforts to exclude the Egyptian Parliament from joining in the drafting of the new Egyptian Constitution;
• The formation by Dr. Muhammad El-Baradie, who during the Mubarak dictatorship was the first to call for constitutionalism and democracy, of a new party.  His party is devoted to constitutional protections with the predictable name of “The Constitution Party” (Al-Dostour Party);
• The defense of Al-Mufti of Egypt, the progressive Sheikh Dr. Aly Jomaa for his religious visit to Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.  The defenders charge his attackers, especially the Salafi’s, of desiring to replace the enlightened Jomaa by a Salafi obscuranist; and
• Counter-attacking Abu-Ismail by alleging that he had lied about his credentials when applying to run for president by not revealing his mother's US citizenship.

In effect, the new Egypt is telling the Salafis: “YOUR MOMMA!!”

In Tahrir: Divided We Stand

There is a fierce battle raging in Egypt in connection with the approaching presidential elections.  Battles of this sort need flags, symbols and throaty screams amplified by microphones.  There are also signs, photos, music, and speeches in Arabic.  This is the way the millions who occupy Tahrir Square in Cairo are pursuing their dreams in post-Mubarak Egypt.

But the ghost of the Mubarak collapsed regime still haunts these diverse factions whose collective dream is to shape the future of Egypt.  With the Islamists garnering 70% of the seats in the new Egyptian Parliament, the only power zones left for contention are: the Constituent Assembly of 100 which has yet to take shape before it delves in to the formulation of the new constitution, and the election of a President.

Egypt is today divided over which direction to take: a State with an Islamic orientation, or a state with a secular orientation.  There are no model in the Arab/Muslim world to follow.  Because of the balance between its ideological/historical forces, the new Egypt can never emerge this summer as another Saudi Arabia (a Wahhabi policed-State).  Nor as another Turkey (a State whose secularity is guaranteed by the armed forces).  Nor as another Iran (an Ayatollahs theocracy).

The colors of the various flags in Tahrir reflect that noisy search for road signs in the most populous Arab State, Egypt of 90 million of 350 million Arabs.  The green flag represents the Muslim Brotherhood which controls 50% of the seats in the new Parliament; the black flag belongs to the Salafis, the Islamic movement which enjoys 20% of parliamentary seats who look to the Wahhabi failed governance model for guidance; and then the tri-color flag of Egypt, official Egypt, with the yellow eagle (the Quraish falcon) stamped on it to declare that Egypt is an Arab country –The Arab Republic of Egypt.

Missing from the parade of flags is a flag for Al-Azhar, the most moderating Islamic institution in the entire Muslim world of nearly 1.5 billion people, most of whom are non-Arabs.  Nor is there a flag with a cross on it, except that of the liberal Wafd party of Saad Zaghbol, Mustapha El-Nahaas, and Makram Obeid (a Copt) who had all passed away from the scene.  The Wafd flag which is still raised proudly at their beautiful building in Cairo shows a crescent hugging a cross –a great symbol of an Egypt made up of both Muslims and Coptics.

The ingathering by the millions in Tahrir and other equivalents all over Egypt, including Alexandria and Suez, took place last Friday.  They were all united by a fear that the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (the SCAF) whose head is General Tantawi, the de facto Head of State since the removal of Mubarak from power, would overstay its welcome beyond June 30, 2012.  “Yasqott Yasqott Hokm El-Askar!!” (Down Down with Military Rule!!) was their unifying chant.  Beyond that, their chants reflected the facts in Tahrir today: the Egyptian body politic is divided, fractured, polarized, and confused.  At least for the present.

What is all the divisions about?  A panel of Egyptian judges, called the Egyptian Election Commission dismissed the applications to run for president of three contenders.  These were Omar Soliman, former Intelligence chief under Mubarak, regarded as a symbol of that collapsed security regime; Khairat El-Shater, candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, as a person who had served time in jail under Mubarak; and Hazem Salah Abu-Ismail, candidate of the Salafi movement, as a person whose mother was an American citizen and thus disallowed from that race by post-Mubarak enactments.

To the Tahrir masses, the motives for those disqualifications by the Election Commission were suspect.  The Commission is headed by Judge Farouk Sultan, the head of the Supreme Constitutional Court, the country’s highest.  He had enjoyed a meteoric rise in the judicial ladder under the Mubarak regime.  Prior to that, he had sat on the military and state security courts, a badge of dishonor in the perception of the new Egypt.  As a neutral agent, Judge Sultan’s problems were compounded by an allegation leveled against him by another senior judge, Zakaria Abdel-Aziz, a former president of the court of appeals.  He called Sultan “a big part” of the former regime.  Hence the suspicion that the SCAF was a co-maker of the decisions adopted by the Farouk Sultan’s Election Commission.

The divergence of views and suspicions were fueled by the fact that decisions adopted by the Sultan Commission were non-appealable.  Who closed the door to such appeals?  Article 28 of the Constitutional declaration promulgated by the SCAF after Mubarak’s departure, pending the formulation and approval of the new Egyptian Constitution.

Presidential candidates who ostensibly remain approved by the Election Commission number, as of now, between 10 to 13.  Leading that pack are: Amr Moussa, former Foreign Minister under Mubarak –a secularist; Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, a liberal Islamist who had split from the Muslim Brotherhood and formed the Freedom and Justice Party; and Hamdeen Sabbahi, a secularist in the mold of the failed pan-Arabism of Gamal Abdel-Nasser who in 1952, led the coup that destroyed Egypt’s old traditional multi-party system.

This is the tip of the iceberg (though it hardly ever snows in Egypt, let alone forming icebergs!!).  There are 20 parties, movements and coalitions, not counting student, labor, professional, university syndical organizations, and artistic groups.

They all competing to be heard, struggling to be visible, and regularly competing for “OCCUPY TAHRIR SQUARE!!”

Mirror Mirror on the Wall, Who is the Fairest of Them All?

Four front runners competing for the post of President of the largest demographically Arab country: Egypt.  The time is short, and the elections are to be held around mid-May.  At this time, out of nearly 1000 would be candidates, only four of them are in the lead.

These are: Amr Moussa, former Secretary-General of the League of Arab States; Abdel-Monim Abu-Elfotouh, formerly of the Muslim Brotherhood, now the head of the Freedom and Justice Party of Egypt, with Brotherhood solid connections; Khairat El-Shatter, the economic and financial brain of the Muslim Brotherhood; and Omar Soliman, former head of Intelligence and former Vice-President of Egypt in the days leading to the collapse of the Mubarak regime.

Who is the Fairest of Them All?  The mirror on the wall is a bit foggy and this blogger cannot read the tea leaves.  Beyond the four front runners named above, there are others who are still in the race, and yet others who are being pushed out of the race.  In the first category, the numbers are too many to count; in the second category (the pushed out), there is the Salafi would-be candidate, Abu-Ismail whose credentials were called into question from his late mother's grave (she was a U.S. citizen -a disqualification).  In the same category, there is Dr. El-Baradie, former Director-General of the UN-affiliated International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) who pushed himself out of the maddening melee.

Had the Revolution of January 25, 2011 been true to itself, Muhammad El-Baradie, a Noble Peace Prize Laureate, should have been declared presidential candidate by acclamation.  But like every revolution, with the US Revolution of 1776 against British domination the only exception, the Egyptian Revolution has swallowed up those who planted the first seeds.  Thus the first potential leader who, under Mubarak's nose, called for freedom and democracy in the then-dictatorial Egypt, El-Baradie was side-lined.  In fact I was afraid that the Mubarak regime might "rub him off," to use the language of the Mafia.  Perhaps, his high world-wide visibility saved his life.  Charisma, his opponents, especially Amr Moussa, claimed was a Baradie-deficiency; his long career abroad, others alleged, made his connection to a complex Egypt rather weak.

Looking into the magic globe at the four front-runners for candidacy for the top job in Egypt, one can see potential problems overwhelming their election by a clear majority.

Amr Moussa had served under Mubarak as a foreign minister.  Abdel-Monim Abu-Elfotouh does not have the backing of the Muslim Brotherhood which commands 50% of seats in the new Parliament.  El-Shatter's candidacy  was like a Johnny-Come-Lately.  The Muslim brotherhood hurriedly pushed that candidacy forward, just a few days before the deadline for papers filing was upon them.  It was a sudden switch, which began with "no nomination from the Brotherhood for President," to "our concern for Egypt caused us to nominate El-Shatter for president."

As to ideology, Abu-Elfotouh is ideologically to the left of the Brotherhood and is an advocate of diversity.  El-Shatter is calling for a modified application of Sharia (Islamic Law).  And Oman Soliman seems destined for failure in his bid, having been the face of a brutalizing Egyptian intelligence for most of his tenure under Mubarak.  As a military man, a General, he is suspected to have the backing of the SCAF (the Supreme Council of Armed Forces).  Yet the SCAF days may come to an end on July 1st of this year.

The mix of presidential aspirants is a bit confusing.  The walls of Egypt everywhere is plastered by electioneering ads.  In fact the traffic in Cairo is super-snarled because of street closures when a candidate is campaigning.  And the Copts, especially after the passing of Pope Shenouda, are guessing at what the future might hold.  So are women, together with the creators of Egyptian art and films.  Egypt desperately needs tourism and trade.

Who is the fairest of them all? Who knows!!

The only certainty is that neither Amr Moussa, nor El-Shatter nor Abu-Elfotouh nor Soliman was in Tahrir Square on Day One when the Revolution of January 25, 2011 erupted.  They seem to have waited to see whether it would topple Mubarak before they decided that the time was ripe to surf the wave to the highest position in the land.  Each one of the above-named gentlemen has a revolutionary deficiency. 

The young who made that epic Revolution, the first popular one since 1919, seem, at least for now, to have gone under that wave.

Needed in Egypt: A Crash Course in Anger Management

In the Constitutional Declaration, an interim legal measure acting as a stop gap pending the drafting of a permanent Constitution for Egypt later this year, there is an important provision for those who are now aspiring to run for president of Egypt.  It says that a candidate for the highest office in this important Arab country, must prove that neither he nor she, nor their parents have ever carried a non-Egyptian passport.

This provision is proving very troublesome to two potential presidential candidates whose orientation is Islamic.  They are: Hazem Salah Abu Ismail, a Salafi (extreme Islamist) and Muhammad Saleem Al-Awwa.  The rumors flooding Egypt now is that the late mother of Abu Ismail had a US passport, and that the father of Al-Awwa was a of Syrian nationality.  Oops!!

A flurry of angry responses, for and against, erupted.  Abu-Ismail declared that his own group was stabbing him in the back.  They were, the would-be candidate charged, a bunch of liars.  Only his sister, who resides in America, carries a US passport, he retorted.  His late mother, he claimed, had only a green card, and was never a US citizen.

In rebuttal to Abu-Ismail, Sheikh Tarek Youssef, an Imam of a mosque in Brooklyn countered as he shook with anger in an interview with an Egyptian cable channel called Dream. "Abu-Ismail is lying about his mother's nationality.  She was an American citizen, thus her son cannot be a candidate for the Egyptian presidency."

At long last, the Supreme Commission for Presidential Elections, stepped in the sea of mutual recrimination.  It said that Egypt's Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Interior had been requested to check on the backgrounds of all aspirants to the presidential post.  Until those investigations are completed, no one should presume what the results might be.

In the meantime, rumors were flying hard and fast about attempts by the Muslim Brotherhood to have Abu-Ismail cede his campaign in favor of its own would be candidate Khairat El-Shatter, a millionaire businessman.  The price for Abu-Ismail's withdrawal would be a vice-presidential position in an El-Shatter administration.  "Absolutely, No," Abu-Ismail's campaign declared.  A vice-presidential candidate is not subject to the same restrictions noted above with regard to a non-Egyptian nationality.  He ended up being excluded from running for president.

Yet in the first mass rally for El-Shatter, there were voices of support which were drowned by counter voices in opposition.  Those opposed to the nominee of the Brotherhood declared on its Facebook page that the nomination of El-Shatter was a disaster.  The Muslim Brotherhood, with a 50% of parliamentary seats, "should not have presented a nominee.  It is a dangerous trap!!  It is wrong for the Brotherhood to shoulder alone the entire heavy burden of ruling Egypt, by cornering for itself both the legislative powers and presidential power as well.  This is a recipe for disaster."

Le us now turn our attention to the Constituent Assembly of 100 which is charged with the awesome responsibility of drafting a post Mubarak constitution.  All eligible voters would say "yea" or "nay" on it in a national referendum whose result would establish a legal baseline for the presidential elections.  The Islamists (the Brotherhood and the Salafis) control 70% of seats in the new Parliament.

In a move to deny the Islamists the exercise of those monopolistic powers in the legislature, in the drafting of a Constitution, and in connection with the election of the president, members of the liberal secular parties simply walked away from the Assembly of 100.  This put the onus on the Islamist majority to fill that critical gap in order to legitimize the constitutionality of the Assembly of 100.

Feverish attempts at compromise followed:  "Please come back.  We need you.  OK??  The vote in the Assembly shall not be 50% + 1; it shall be 60%.  We shall also abide by Al-Azhar declarations about diversity, inclusiveness, and representativeness of the entire rainbow of Egyptian society including the Copts.  Would you please come back??"  "No!" said the secularists.  "Your Assembly has no legitimacy because it does not reflect the shades of the entirety of Egyptian public opinion."

Rage On, Egypt!!  Democracy lives on intelligent compromises.  So find your way to a middle ground!!

For the First Time, Egypt Is Choosing its President, So Why Is Egypt Laughing?

• The Supreme Commission for Presidential Elections in Egypt issues application forms to Egyptians desiring to run for the highest office of President.  It has been swamped by applicants.  Its Chairman, Counselor Farouk Sultan, said that they had expected 150 such applicants.  Instead, by March 20, the number of applicants had reached 900 and counting.

• Looking at the identities of some of the would-be Presidents of the nearly 90 million Egyptians is a Nubian who came from Aswan seeking that high honor.  When newsmen asked him what his program for post-Mubarak Egypt might be, his answer was: "to fight poverty; to ban the national food of Falafel and Foul (beans) and replace it by meat."

• Any Egyptian may ask for a form stipulating the provisions authorizing the entry into the race for the Presidential office. A candidate for that Office, if not sponsored by one of the political parties represented in the new Parliament, must have a certain number of authorized signatures of citizens (30,000 such signatures) from 15 out of the 27 Provinces (Governorates) throughout Egypt.  These procedures have created a stampede to collect signatures if party backing is lacking.  The form is called "a deputizing form," on which the signer names his or her candidate for President.  The stampede, in turn, has led to new forms of corruption.  An illiterate woman, while asking for the form at an authorized office, threw it away when told about possible violations leading to a jail term.  "What?" she screamed.  Then went on to say tearfully: "This was not what we agreed upon with that candidate.  I do not need his bags of rice and sugar if my support leads me to prison!!!"

• In the meantime, another citizen, a male from the Governorate of Giza, South of Cairo, where the Pyramids stand to attest to Egypt's durability, was on his way to jail.  That individual entered the offices of the Supreme Commission for Presidential Elections to get the necessary documentation for entering the presidential electoral races.  The police immediately placed him under arrest.  For in his possession, there was a large amount of drugs, a hashish-derivative called Bango.

• Truth be told, not all Egyptians were laughing at this avalanche of high office seekers or publicity seekers.  At the entrance of one of the many "forms distribution centers," a taxi driver left his cab running at the curb to voice his indignation at the media.  Looking straight at TV cameras which were focusing on the out of ordinary office seekers, he shouted: "Shame on the Media.  You are giving our beloved Egypt a terrible name.  You are making of all of us a laughing stock.  How can the world believe that great Egypt allows a coffee vendor or a simple laborer to run for President?  In America, the limit is only two." Hey!! Welcome to popular democracy.  Love it or leave it!!

• So what is behind the nearly one thousand aspirants to the Egyptian Presidency?  Oh, yes: there goes the conspiracy theory again.  But this time, it is not in Mubarak's bed, as one of our previous blogs had indicated.  It is in the now dissolved National Party -the party through which Mubarak had governed Egypt as a security State for 32 years.  How does the National Party (Al-Foloul: in Arabic, the Remnants) get involved in this unwieldy Egyptian presidential race?  Aha!!  The presumed answer was said to have been discovered by Dr. Medhat Khafagi, a candidate for that office.  He claims that, "The Dissolved (in Arabic: "Al-Monhal") -the National Party- is trying to give the glorious January 25 Revolution a bad name!!  Therefore the Dissolved pushed the rank and file from the endless corners of Egyptian poverty to run for President including a baker, a hair dresser, and a doorman.!! Even if such unqualified individuals have no chance to be President, the fact of their applying for the job would accomplish the goal of showing the Revolution as mob-oriented!!"