ISIS is not the only source of subversion of Islam. Of equal lethality are citizens of non-Muslim societies who act on ISIS inspiration to murder their co-citizens. In the name of Islam. A stab in the back for environments which ensured for them freedom of faith. Only, as in Orlando, or San Bernardino, or Fort Hood, to kill in cold blood their protectors.
The choice for lookouts on Islam is immensely stark. It is either from the summit of Muhammad Ali, a world champion, or the gutter of Omar Mateen who killed and maimed more than a hundred of his neighbors at a night club in Florida.
In the world of US presidential campaigning, the choice of lookouts on Islam begins with the summit of Obama. Refusing to label such massacre "Islamic terrorism." And ends with the abyss of Republican presumptive presidential nominee, Trump. Clamoring for walling out all Muslims from entering the US. In the squalor of his ignorance, Trump should know that the creation of fortress America is the very hope of the evil-doers, free at the gates, gaining from American immobility for inflicting maximum harm.
Returning to the comparison between how Muhammad Ali viewed Islam, and how that Orlando thug clothed his criminality in an ISIS garb.
Let us here again recall the meaning of the term "Muslim." In Islamic Law, it is not restricted to the adherents of Islam. It applies to any human being, regardless of any faith, who practices what I could here term: "the subsidiarity of will. The human will is subsidiary to the will of the Creator." The term "infidel" does not mean "non-Muslim." It means a person who has no values. Nor is the term "hold war" an Islamic term. Nor is the expression "killing for the sake of God." Nor is "Allahu Akbar," used by terrorist morons as a battle cry. It is a pledge to the equality of all humans in the eyes of God.
Muhammad Ali, the Afro-American convert, lived that creed of universality. At his funeral on Friday, June 10, held at Louisville, Kentucky, leaders of every faith eulogized him. In him, they had a lookout at the summit. Prayers were read from the palette of every faith which Ali had honored. As in the best traditions of Islamic Law, all of those faiths were his paths to an inner truth.
In the Quran, Ali's conduct conformed to this verse from the Quran: "Indeed God has bought from believers their lives and their wealth, that they shall have the Gardens... a pledge from God made in the Torah, in the Bible, and in the Quran. And who is more true in fulfilling His covenant than God..." (Chapter IX, verse 111).
By contrast, Omar Mateen, the Orlando mass killer, made his pledge, not to Islam, but to ISIS, the proverbial subverter of Islam. Mateen had called 911 to proclaim his allegiance (Baiaa) to ISIS. That was before he, on June 12, stormed that night club to kill in fulfillment of their pledge.
One criminal act, in fact the worst act of mass shooting on US soil in history was soon the occasion for Donald Trump to "appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism." Using an oxymoron expression "Islamic terrorism." A vicious linkage between Islam as faith, and terrorism as criminality of which the Muslim world is still the largest target. What compounds Trump's insensitivity is opportuning a massive human tragedy for sordid electioneering ends.
While Ali saw in himself a citizen of America and the world, Mateen saw himself an adherent of a mythical caliphate, soon to be thrown in the dust bin of history.
It is saddening to recall my interviewing of Ali at the UN for the UN Radio during my service for the world organization. His wit, his humor, his cascading torrents of adjectives, were power in action. All within the summitry of his belief in universality.
It is no wonder that Ali's widow, Lonnie, said that "Muhammad indicated that when the end came for him, he wanted to use his life and his death as a teaching moment." And it was.
As for Noor, Mateen's wife, she is said to have driven him to his Orlando target, armed for the kill. Purported to have pleaded with him not to harm anyone. By contrast, Muhammad Ali sought in his new faith, a connection to humanity. As for Omar, he had told his co-workers that he thought martyrdom. None of the Islamic Law standards for martyrdom applied to him.
In Islam, only self-defense is the core of permissible war. It is combat that stops at the borders of an Islamic State under attack. It is also the vehicle for negotiating peace with the adversary, once that adversary is inclined toward peace negotiations. The Quran provides for this rule of post-conflict resolution. "But if they incline to peace, then incline to it, and trust in God. Indeed He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing." (Chapter VIII, verse 6).
But for Mateen, the pretender to martyrdom, the Quran stops him far away from his goal. It says: "We prescribed to the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul, unless it be for retaliation or because of spreading corruption on earth, it would be as if he had killed all mankind. And whoever saves a life, it would be as if he had saved the life of all mankind." (Chapter V, verse 32).
And where is Mateen from that gentle giant Muhammad Ali?! Mateen's former wife, Ms. Yusufiy had married him in a ceremony in a Florida courthouse in 2009. Following the Orlando massacre, she made revelations about him to the authorities. Referring to an incident of domestic abuse, she said: "He almost killed me. Because he started choking me. And I somehow got out of it and I tried to tackle him."
Where is Mateen from the tradition of the Prophet Muhammad who admonished: "Do not be bad news for your household." The moral here is that your household had nothing to do with whatever bad happened to you outside of your home. So don't even dare return home and take your anger on them.
And aside from attitudes, Islamic Law sees only gender equality. For it has to be read as supplemented by legislated law. Having elevated women from being a mere chattel, and decreed the abandonment of female infanticide, it made marriage a contract. A contract which ensured for the wife economic independence through an agreed dowry in arrears in case of divorce.
It is unfortunate that wahhabism, through enforced separation of women from male public life, had distorted those rules. By his oppressive behavior as a husband, Mateen adhered to rules which do not exist in either Islamic jurisprudence, or Islamic practices.
What a contrast between a world champion who saw in his adopted faith the common bonds between humans everywhere, and a world scumbag, who prided himself on living the gutter values of ISIS. Eulogies for Ali gushed forth on June 10 from a priest, an imam, a rabbi, a monk, former President Clinton, and an indigenous American Indian chief, and a famous comedian.
Through his heinous mass murder, Mateen united the whole world in his condemnation. Even the UN Security Council issued on June 14 a statement of condemnation, proposed by the US, and joined by Russian and Egypt.
Ali's coffin traveled through 20 miles of Louisville, cheered, saluted by thousands of people chanting his name: Ali, Ali, Ali. Ali had scripted his funeral as he had scripted his life. Saw in his leave-taking from this world a chance befitting the inclusiveness of his faith.
From the lookout on Islam through the summit of Muhammad Ali, it is difficult to transition to the lookout on Islam from the gutter of Omar Mateen. For the latter gloried in the debauchery of mass murder in the name of ISIS. An occasion for uniting the fractured Islamophobic tendencies in the US.
As is guaranteed by the US constitution, freedom of faith is a basic precept in Islamic Law. The Quran states:"Say, 'O people, surely there has come to you the truth from your Lord. Whoever is guided, is guided only for his own soul. And whoever goes astray, he is astray only for his soul, and I (meaning the Prophet Muhammad) am not a trustee over you.'" (Chapter II, verse 108).
These are the spiritual links between faith, every kind of faith, and human conduct. Epitomized at its best by Muhammad Ali whose faith was a bridge across all continents!!
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Assessing An Act of Gargantuan Leadership: Saving Egypt Three Years Ago From A Seismic Civil War
That was a one historic act by El-Sisi, responding to 35 million voices calling on June 30, 2013 for deliverance. From every public square in that pivotal country, called Egypt, the chant against Morsi and the Brotherhood to leave was thunderous. But it needed a protective mechanism. The only mechanism was the national army.
But the chant of "IRHAL" (Begone!!) had a constitutional reason. The Islamic Constitution of 2012 was drafted by Brotherhood hands. The liberals, including the Copts, were forced out of the drafting. No provision was there in that document allowing for recalling the President. A Brotherhood overreach meant to last, but was destined to collapse.
Deposing Morsi was not planned. It was the result of the obduracy of an ideologically-fossilized organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. Such a group does not understand the art of political compromise. From June 30, 2013 to July 3, 2013, the national conversation begun by El-Sisi, as Minister of Defense, to have the process of choosing a President begun again, went nowhere.
The Brotherhood Guidance Bureau, the actual ruler of Egypt, was determined to fight back and keep a sham process going on. Legitimacy (Shariyah) for the Islamists was above practicality -a practical compromise, advocated by El-Sisi to avert civil war.
The Brotherhood's claim rang hollow. The contest for the presidency between Morsi, the Brotherhood's second choice for office after El-Shatter was disqualified, and General Shafiq produced a doubtful result. 51% for Morsi, 49% for Shafiq was a non-verifiable statistic. And the choice of President preceded the drafting of a constitution. Talk about putting the cart before the horse!!
Prior to the plebiscite on that defective constitution, where Coptic rights to citizenship parity were nowhere, Morsi had declared himself to be above the Constitution. A determined dictatorship in the making. Morsi was another name for Mussolini. That fascist formula was then taken one step further. A parliament dissolved by the Supreme Constitutional Court on a technicality was ordered by the President to reconvene.
The agenda of that reconvened Parliament was one item to be enacted in 20 minutes. An enactment that delegated to the Executive (the President) legislative powers. An anomaly that alarmed a nation which since 1923 had luxuriated prior to the Nasser coup of 1952 in constitutional democracy. 80 years of practice, which anteceded the Brotherhood's birth in 1928.
With the collapse of El-Sisi-led negotiations, the threat of civil war loomed as a certainty. Morsi had to go; a road map in which the liberal leadership of Egypt concurred, including the Coptic Church, was at hand; a transitional government was formed; an interim president, Judge Adly Mansour, chief of the harassed Supreme Constitutional Court, was installed; and preparations for the redrafting of a new and secular Constitution began in earnest.
In all of this, there was no coup by El-Sisi. The process meant the undoing of the Brotherhood's coup which followed installing Morsi as President. The core problem of that Islamic presidency was complex: The Brotherhood regarded Egypt as a spring board to a mythical Islamic State; force was the first option in dealing with Ethiopia; Sinai was to be the hinterland for Hamas; The copts and the shiis were smitten into submission. Turkey and Qatar were eager funders for the new Islamic order in Cairo; and a wahhabi-like theocracy was seen as Egypt of the future!!
These were all realities of the one-year rule by the Brotherhood. A year which also saw in the Islamic Republic of Iran a role model. So parallel security forces were formed: from a replica of the Revolutionary Guards, to the militias patterned along the lines of the Iranian Basig, created by Khomeini. How could such developments escape the attention of the proud non-sectarian huge Egyptian army?
With the corrective revolution of June 30, 2013, came the physical proof of the Brotherhood's determination to collapse the national will. The occupation by unruly and gangs of street roughs trained in urban warfare occupying the Cairo squares of Rabaa and Al-Nahdha.
Weddings were performed, so was the storing of armaments. Bread was baked, and calls for soldiers and policemen to defect were issued. Foreign intervention was urged, and a mighty propaganda machine was put to work on a Brotherhood signal!! The two squares in the heart of Cairo were declared Islamic emirates.
And I was told that the Brotherhood would never leave!! Without heeding the lesson of refusing to compromise from June 30 to July 3, their tactic was that the Rabaa and Al-Nahda rebellions would spark a conflagration. The enemy of the Islamists was, and continues to be the June 30 Revolution. So for six weeks, the entreaties by the Government for peaceful disbanding were responded to by more violence. God was believed to be on the side of collapsing the modern secular State. It was a suicidal belief. Spun out of the inherent hypocrisy of using faith for the ends of unjust power.
It was not a conflict between two opponents, with each of them holding to values common to historic Egypt. It was the onset of a conflagration of existential proportions for the very soul of Egypt. With the Brotherhood aiming at the upending of a secular Egypt, and the majority of the population aiming at continuity. Egypt's DNA has never carried theocratic chromosomes. Nor has that DNA ever carried in it the germ of civil war. This has always been a cohesive and inclusive society.
For since 7000 years, the State produced the faith, not the faith the State; the Pyramids representing the lofty stability of the State cast their huge shadow on the temples below; even the army was a State-creation, unlike in Israel, for example, where the army created the State.
Thus in the fight for the soul of Egypt, the views of a noisy minority were no more than an echo chamber within the Guidance Bureau,the Islamic Politburo. Whereas the security forces, as of July 3, 2013 were reflective of Egypt's DNA. With only the megaphones of the Brotherhood globally blaring nonsense about phony legitimacy, the Egyptian street, whose only protection from a fascist putsch was the national army, was asserting its sovereign primacy.
El-Sisi's assumption of the presidency was not through the armed forces. As universally witnessed, it was through the ballot boxes.
Let us now peer into the Brotherhood's ideology. In one word, their "ideology" translates into "hypocrisy." For they are not about "faith;" they are about "power;" dressed up as "faith." For evidence, here are examples:
From all indications, both Rabaa and Al-Nahda represented a counter-revolution which sought self-sacrifice. A tenet of the Brotherhood's Charter. That Charter proclaims: "Death for the Sake of Allah is our most cherished aspiration." Its secondary mission is an invitation for foreign intervention.
The Quran implicates the Brotherhood in bringing about that bloodshed upon itself and upon Egypt's security forces. "Whatever good comes to you, it is from God. And whatever misfortune befalls you, it is your own doing..." (Chapter IV, Verse 79).
Now fast forward to El-Sisi's reign, and a cursory review of its accomplishments in a country saved by him from civil war:
With the secular Constitution approved, then promulgated in 2014, presidential elections followed. The result was a first for the New Egypt: El-Sisi became the first President in the history of modern Egypt to be voted for the highest office through fair, open, and scrupulously-monitored elections. The man who is now embodying the true DNA, of his country.
The oldest nation on earth was now ready for rebuilding from the bottom up. That is in spite of an economic decline, and two wars on terrorism going on in Sinai and at the Libyan borders.
In a TV interview with Osama Kamal of the Egyptian TV, he produces his own report card. With characteristic humility, he speaks of: "We" as a collective leadership: (my translation from the Arabic).
Here we note:
As Egypt enters this phase of accelerated reconstruction, confidence-building trends multiply:
On behalf of history, Thank you CC!! Your Egypt is no Syria!!
But the chant of "IRHAL" (Begone!!) had a constitutional reason. The Islamic Constitution of 2012 was drafted by Brotherhood hands. The liberals, including the Copts, were forced out of the drafting. No provision was there in that document allowing for recalling the President. A Brotherhood overreach meant to last, but was destined to collapse.
Deposing Morsi was not planned. It was the result of the obduracy of an ideologically-fossilized organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. Such a group does not understand the art of political compromise. From June 30, 2013 to July 3, 2013, the national conversation begun by El-Sisi, as Minister of Defense, to have the process of choosing a President begun again, went nowhere.
The Brotherhood Guidance Bureau, the actual ruler of Egypt, was determined to fight back and keep a sham process going on. Legitimacy (Shariyah) for the Islamists was above practicality -a practical compromise, advocated by El-Sisi to avert civil war.
The Brotherhood's claim rang hollow. The contest for the presidency between Morsi, the Brotherhood's second choice for office after El-Shatter was disqualified, and General Shafiq produced a doubtful result. 51% for Morsi, 49% for Shafiq was a non-verifiable statistic. And the choice of President preceded the drafting of a constitution. Talk about putting the cart before the horse!!
Prior to the plebiscite on that defective constitution, where Coptic rights to citizenship parity were nowhere, Morsi had declared himself to be above the Constitution. A determined dictatorship in the making. Morsi was another name for Mussolini. That fascist formula was then taken one step further. A parliament dissolved by the Supreme Constitutional Court on a technicality was ordered by the President to reconvene.
The agenda of that reconvened Parliament was one item to be enacted in 20 minutes. An enactment that delegated to the Executive (the President) legislative powers. An anomaly that alarmed a nation which since 1923 had luxuriated prior to the Nasser coup of 1952 in constitutional democracy. 80 years of practice, which anteceded the Brotherhood's birth in 1928.
With the collapse of El-Sisi-led negotiations, the threat of civil war loomed as a certainty. Morsi had to go; a road map in which the liberal leadership of Egypt concurred, including the Coptic Church, was at hand; a transitional government was formed; an interim president, Judge Adly Mansour, chief of the harassed Supreme Constitutional Court, was installed; and preparations for the redrafting of a new and secular Constitution began in earnest.
In all of this, there was no coup by El-Sisi. The process meant the undoing of the Brotherhood's coup which followed installing Morsi as President. The core problem of that Islamic presidency was complex: The Brotherhood regarded Egypt as a spring board to a mythical Islamic State; force was the first option in dealing with Ethiopia; Sinai was to be the hinterland for Hamas; The copts and the shiis were smitten into submission. Turkey and Qatar were eager funders for the new Islamic order in Cairo; and a wahhabi-like theocracy was seen as Egypt of the future!!
These were all realities of the one-year rule by the Brotherhood. A year which also saw in the Islamic Republic of Iran a role model. So parallel security forces were formed: from a replica of the Revolutionary Guards, to the militias patterned along the lines of the Iranian Basig, created by Khomeini. How could such developments escape the attention of the proud non-sectarian huge Egyptian army?
With the corrective revolution of June 30, 2013, came the physical proof of the Brotherhood's determination to collapse the national will. The occupation by unruly and gangs of street roughs trained in urban warfare occupying the Cairo squares of Rabaa and Al-Nahdha.
Weddings were performed, so was the storing of armaments. Bread was baked, and calls for soldiers and policemen to defect were issued. Foreign intervention was urged, and a mighty propaganda machine was put to work on a Brotherhood signal!! The two squares in the heart of Cairo were declared Islamic emirates.
And I was told that the Brotherhood would never leave!! Without heeding the lesson of refusing to compromise from June 30 to July 3, their tactic was that the Rabaa and Al-Nahda rebellions would spark a conflagration. The enemy of the Islamists was, and continues to be the June 30 Revolution. So for six weeks, the entreaties by the Government for peaceful disbanding were responded to by more violence. God was believed to be on the side of collapsing the modern secular State. It was a suicidal belief. Spun out of the inherent hypocrisy of using faith for the ends of unjust power.
It was not a conflict between two opponents, with each of them holding to values common to historic Egypt. It was the onset of a conflagration of existential proportions for the very soul of Egypt. With the Brotherhood aiming at the upending of a secular Egypt, and the majority of the population aiming at continuity. Egypt's DNA has never carried theocratic chromosomes. Nor has that DNA ever carried in it the germ of civil war. This has always been a cohesive and inclusive society.
For since 7000 years, the State produced the faith, not the faith the State; the Pyramids representing the lofty stability of the State cast their huge shadow on the temples below; even the army was a State-creation, unlike in Israel, for example, where the army created the State.
Thus in the fight for the soul of Egypt, the views of a noisy minority were no more than an echo chamber within the Guidance Bureau,the Islamic Politburo. Whereas the security forces, as of July 3, 2013 were reflective of Egypt's DNA. With only the megaphones of the Brotherhood globally blaring nonsense about phony legitimacy, the Egyptian street, whose only protection from a fascist putsch was the national army, was asserting its sovereign primacy.
El-Sisi's assumption of the presidency was not through the armed forces. As universally witnessed, it was through the ballot boxes.
Let us now peer into the Brotherhood's ideology. In one word, their "ideology" translates into "hypocrisy." For they are not about "faith;" they are about "power;" dressed up as "faith." For evidence, here are examples:
- In 1947, they murdered in cold blood, Egypt's Prime Minister, Al-Nokrashi Pasha. An act precipitating the Government of Abdel-Hadi murdering their Supreme Guide and Founder, Hassan El-Banna in 1948 in Cairo;
- Having infiltrated the officers corps of the Egyptian armed forces, they played a crucial role in the Nasser coup of 1952. Nasser had used them, and in return, they thought that they could use him. With Nasser having the bigger and more disciplined guns on his side, he outfoxed the Brotherhood. Manipulated the so-called Alexandria assassination attempt on his life in 1954. A golden occasion, whether true or contrived, to ban them.
- Treachery, deceit and cunning beget the same. What goes in at one end, comes out of the other end. With the hanging of Sayed Qutb, the spiritual father of terrorism in the name of Islam, in the mid 1960s the Brotherhood laid low, focusing on social work. It was its means for grass-roots infiltration.
- But never abandoning its core values represented by its logo: Two swords, framing the Quran, with the words "And Prepare" (Wa Aaedou). The first Quranic words for the verse beginning with: "And prepare for them with whatever force you can..." (Chapter 5/Verse 60).
- In that combative logo,defining Muslims into "we and the others," is a departure from Islamic jurisprudence. A system based on Quran, Muhammad's tradition, and ijtihad (interpretation), with the emphasis on TAWHEED - God is One. As the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Dr. Ahmed Al-Taiyeb had declared last May in Germany, Nigeria and France: "A Muslim means any human being of whatever faith who makes his will subservient to God's will."
- No wonder that the Brotherhood's celebration in June 2012 of Morsi's taking the oath of office as President (for the third time) at Cairo University, gave Dr. Al-Taiyeb a back seat. Al-Taiyeb walked away from that deliberate humiliation.
- And no wonder that Muhammad Ali, the great boxing champion and an Afro-American, was eulogized on June 10 by an array of leaders of every faith on earth. For Ali the convert held bibles which he purchased close to his bosom. Both Muhammad Ali and Ahmed Al-Taiyeb are on the same side of an Islam as the expression of faith in a Creator for all of humanity. An Islam which stands on the world stage respected for tolerance, not feared for terrorism.
From all indications, both Rabaa and Al-Nahda represented a counter-revolution which sought self-sacrifice. A tenet of the Brotherhood's Charter. That Charter proclaims: "Death for the Sake of Allah is our most cherished aspiration." Its secondary mission is an invitation for foreign intervention.
The Quran implicates the Brotherhood in bringing about that bloodshed upon itself and upon Egypt's security forces. "Whatever good comes to you, it is from God. And whatever misfortune befalls you, it is your own doing..." (Chapter IV, Verse 79).
Now fast forward to El-Sisi's reign, and a cursory review of its accomplishments in a country saved by him from civil war:
With the secular Constitution approved, then promulgated in 2014, presidential elections followed. The result was a first for the New Egypt: El-Sisi became the first President in the history of modern Egypt to be voted for the highest office through fair, open, and scrupulously-monitored elections. The man who is now embodying the true DNA, of his country.
The oldest nation on earth was now ready for rebuilding from the bottom up. That is in spite of an economic decline, and two wars on terrorism going on in Sinai and at the Libyan borders.
- A second Suez Canal;
- Rebuilding the naval forces through the purchase of French aircraft carriers. While keeping an American excess of armed vehicles flowing at no cost to combat terrorism. Armored vehicles shielding troops from roadside bombs; A total of 762 such vehicles called MRAP, which stands for mine-resistant, ambush-protected;
- Reclaiming 1.5 million acres from the Egyptian desert, while ensuring an adequate supply of surface and underground water;
- Returning Egypt to the African Union, and to its natural allies and sources of emergency funding in the Gulf;
- Ensuring energy sufficiency through German technology, and the return to atomic programs for peaceful purposes through Russian know-how;
- Pursuit of the new Religious Revolution through Al-Azhar, and the banning of the preachers of hate and anti-coptism through laws. Meaningful presidential participation in celebrations at the Coptic St. Mark's Cathedral at Abbasiya, Cairo;
- Declaring the reconstruction of a new administrative capital, east of Cairo;
- The utilization of the "Tahiya Misr Fund" in new zoning for roads, housing, refuse removal, bridges, and grain silos;
- Revamping the creaky educational and health systems;
- Resorting to summitry and presidential visits to newly emerging mega economies, to rebuild tourism, and to borrow from the east its new techniques for mass transfer to the 21st century;
- Refocusing on Egypt, while avoiding intervention in the affairs of sister Arab States, shunning the old interventionist propaganda line of "Egypt knows best!!"
- Involving the Italians and the Americans in harnessing the natural gas discoveries;
- And harnessing the huge demographics in the arduous task of national production.
In a TV interview with Osama Kamal of the Egyptian TV, he produces his own report card. With characteristic humility, he speaks of: "We" as a collective leadership: (my translation from the Arabic).
- "Exerting before June 30 all efforts at reconciling between the Rulers and Society. Efforts emanating from fears of a rupture between the State and the people;"
- "The evil-doers are those who intentionally aim at hurting Egypt. Whether the Egyptian people or the Egyptian State;"
- "The Egyptian people know who are the practitioners of evil, internally and externally;"
- "For as long as the Egyptian people are united, we experience no fear. We only experience anxiety if the Egyptian public does not act as one;"
- "What goes on now is nothing more than futile attempts to destroy the State from within;"
- "I did not agonize over whether to compete for the presidency of Egypt. But there were measures which had to be in place prior to my taking that step;"
- "My goal remains to protect the State from collapse. If this shall be my only achievement, I would see in it a great mission accomplished;"
- "Today we have State institutions, a Constitution, mechanisms, and a State in the process of being restored with a renewed spirit."
Here we note:
- The Sinai terror, exaggerated in the press internally and externally as a force determining Egypt of the future. That is in spite of the fact that terror space is confined to 2% to 3% of the Sinai land mass between Gaza and El-Arish;
- That there exists in the Arab region a vacuum. Forcing Egypt to act. For what objective? El-Sisi says it best in that TV interview: "We must be able to effect a balance, not aiming at neither hidden agendas or coveting land or wealth. Our only agenda is to repel those who aim at harming us or our neighbors."
- That the Egyptian press of today has a zero role in public education. Its focus confuses between "the freedom of expression," and "the freedom for malicious rendering of the news." Offering daily admonition to El-Sisi regarding their own perception of what should and should not be done. The depth of their shame is to be measured by their calling the islands of Tiran and Sanafir a territorial Saudi grab.
As Egypt enters this phase of accelerated reconstruction, confidence-building trends multiply:
- In the rejection of the neo-imperialism of foreign non-governmental organizations like "Amnesty International." Trying to measure the status of freedom of expression in Egypt with the same yardstick applicable to western States which did not suffer the ravages of the Arab Spring;
- The rise of many indigenous NGOs. Examples: "Naebat Qademat" (women legislators in the making), headed by Dr. Nahid Shaker. And the "Organization for Constitutional Protection," headed by Amre Moussa;
- The rise of the movement for local administrations, decentralized for quick response on the ground:
- The responsiveness to the Coptic Church, while calling for revamping the archaic laws impeding church construction and repairs;
- The emphasis on projects where there exists a direct relationship between cost and benefit and a time budget for completion;
- Bringing up the rear of Egypt's geographic surface, for far too long neglected, like Sinai, Nubia, and the huge western Egyptian dessert;
- The realignment of foreign relations in order to better serve the parity of sovereignty among States, the possible revision of the Charter of the League of Arab States; and
- Adherence to the laws for public demonstrations within its promulgated provisions, the respect for judicial independence, and for women empowerment.
On behalf of history, Thank you CC!! Your Egypt is no Syria!!
Friday, May 27, 2016
The New Religious Revolution: Countering Jihadism, Al-Azhar Strikes Back
Sharia coupled with ijtihad (reason applied to text) are of tremendous lethal power. Against jihadism: ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Nusra Front, the Friends of Beit Al-Maqdis and Boko Haram. These are the forces of evil which have for long manipulated a legitimate longing. It is the longing of 1.7 Billion Muslims to join the world caravan, moving toward technological progress while keeping the values of faith. Every faith.
Yet that longing needs a voice. An institutional voice. A voice that does not simply say that Islam is a faith of tolerance. Because Islam, though simple to understand, could be confusing to comprehend. Especially for a western mind. And we are all now living the age of rage, of the non-state actors, of Trumpism which puts force ahead of reason.
To find that voice which could effectively counter jihadism, I peer over the horizon from New York City, looking eastward for a distance of 7000 miles. Over that horizon, I could imagine seeing the 4 minarets of Al-Azhar. A mosque and a university of more than 1000 years. That is where my late father studied, and brought up his family on the love for Al-Azhar. Why?
It has a universal message for all. Taught Islam in all its stripes, mainly Sunni and Shii. Has always been the focus of Egyptian nationalism and universal interaction. That is where the idea of American Senator Fulbright originated in the 14th century when African Emperor Mansa Musa of the Mali Empire decided on a bold course. Students studying abroad at Al-Azhar and funded by the seat of the Empire in Timbuktu. I shared that history with Senator Fulbright of Arkansas at Columbia University in 1954. He was greeting me as a Fulbright scholar. Was enchanted by the fact that his idea originated in Africa, and entered it in the Congressional record.
So the link between Al-Azhar and Africa is long and deep. Reason why its present Rector, Dr. Ahmed El-Taiyeb, a Sorbonne graduate, chose Abuja, the Nigerian capital, to address the terror catastrophe of Boko Haram. A hideous term, meaning: "Western learning is unislamic."
A total negation of what Islam (faith and knowledge) has stood for since the 7th century. Except during dark ages, not of the Crusaders (that was a passing episode); but of the Ottoman Empire. An Empire which suffered from a split personality: diversity of religions, but glorification of Turkish culture, and avoidance of modernization.
In Nigeria, El-Taiyeb's voice could reverberate through the great continent where Egyptian civilization, born 7000 years ago, was the first African civilization. And is still enduring. Threatened only by jihadism of which Boko Haram and Al-Shabab and the ISIS franchises are standard bearers.
The booming voice of Al-Azhar, uttered by its Grand Imam, who was hosted by Nigerian president, Buhari (A Muslim from Northern Nigeria) carried multiple messages. All of which are anti-jihadi. As his first salvo, he called jihadists "wrong-doers," as he quoted from the Quran: "And do not think that God is unaware of what the wrongdoers do. He only puts them in respite until a Day when eyes shall stare." (Chapter 14/Verse 42).
Referring to the wayward jihadis (calling themselves Muslim extremists is giving into their high jacking of the mantle of Islam) as wrongdoers, he went on to turn the table on them. He intoned:
In that regard, Al-Azhar, through the voice of Dr. El-Taiyeb is heard to say: "If we are to exit these bloody crises which inflict our world from end to end, and whose victims are largely the poor and uneducated in every faith and creed, we have to chart a new course..."
"A course which begins by a question: Is the relationship between Islam and other religions based on tension, suspicion, and foreboding? No!! In the Quran, Islam is not only the name of a certain faith. Islam is the name of a common faith which all believers, from whatever faith, subscribe to."
El-Taiyeb's evidence? "The Quran described Abraham as a Muslim. That was thousands of years before Muhammad's message. The Quran spoke of Ismail and Isaac as they raised the foundation of the first place of worship saying: Our Lord: lead us to submit to Your Will and raise from our offspring a nation which will submit to Your Will." (Chapter 2/Verse 128).
Here the emphasis by Al-Azhar is on the connotation of the term "Muslim." Meaning those who submit to the will of the Creator. It is not restrictive, as the jihadis in their ignorance advocate, to the world of Islam alone. An important distinction, of an ideological nature in the ideological war on jihadism.
Now to the stance of the Quran on other holy books. El-Taiyeb provides a definitive response: Equal respect and parallel veneration. Citing the Quranic text on the Torah where it says: "It was We who revealed the Law to Moses: therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophets who bowed, as in Islam, to God's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law." (Chapter V, verse 44).
Followed by Quranic continuity on the New Testament. "And in their footsteps we sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God." (Chapter V, Verse 46).
As if in a Heavenly Club of God's messengers, whose membership is premised on co-equality, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar cites the Prophet Muhammad as per his authenticated tradition. By that Muhammedan tradition, the Prophet of Islam has declared: "I am the most rightful inheritor of Jesus. In this world and in the hereafter. The Messengers are brothers. Born to different Mothers. But having one faith."
What an apt riposte, a quick counterstrike, to the dark heart of the jihadis who claim that the only true religion for mankind is Islam. Embellished by the wickedness and the viciousness of the ridiculous claim of "Reserved only for Sunni Muslims." Thus wiping out the verity that in Islam, there is no Sunni vs. Shii. Except in the minds of those who use faith as a mechanism for control.
In that historic speech in Abuja, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Shareef does not limit the circle of respect and authenticity to "the revealed religions" (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). For more than half of humanity abide by Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism.
El-Taiyeb goes on to clarify the reason for the Quranic silence on all these faiths. He says: "These were religions not known to the Arabs in the Arabian peninsula nearly 1500 years ago. Yet they are included within the spacious tent of the Quran in regard to respect and equal treatment expected of every Muslim towards the adherents of these faiths."
That inclusiveness is manifest in the Quranic instruction for justice and amity towards "the adherents of every faith, every creed, and every philosophy which do not aggress against Muslims in Muslim lands." The very words of Imam El-Taiyeb in Abuja. Words which he bolsters by the primary source of Islamic Law, the Quran.
Thus he quotes: "God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for your faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them, for God loveth those who are just." (Chapter 60, Verse 8).
The above material covers only half of the Abuja speech by the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Shareef. Space limitation of this blog posting does not allow for its comprehensive coverage. So in the remaining space, let us deal with the following conclusions:
Ironically jihadism which had inflicted on our world 9/11 and beyond, has its unwitting Muslim auxiliaries. Here are examples:
But the fact remains that polls indicate that 7 of the top 10 countries which view America most unfavorably are Muslim countries. It is obvious that the US/Israel strategic alliance plays a considerable role in that unfavorability. But this is not the full picture.
The issues of faith and politics cross one another at dangerous angles. Including the misunderstanding of Islam. By non-Muslims and those who call themselves Muslims, as in the case of the jihadis.
But at least, on the religious ramparts, there stands a sentinel called Al-Azhar Al-Shareef. Whose head, Ahmed Al-Taiyeb is now engaged in a shuttle of global efforts of enlightened clarification: FAITH IS ONE!!
A message which he has recently carried to Germany, followed by Nigeria, followed by the Vatican, and lastly to France.
This is where he had internalized at this Alma Mater, the Sorbonne motto of all France: Liberte; Egalite; Fraternite. With a universal application. The most effective wooden stake being plunged in the heart of Drakula -a name which is most befitting the so-called jihadis of today.
Yet that longing needs a voice. An institutional voice. A voice that does not simply say that Islam is a faith of tolerance. Because Islam, though simple to understand, could be confusing to comprehend. Especially for a western mind. And we are all now living the age of rage, of the non-state actors, of Trumpism which puts force ahead of reason.
To find that voice which could effectively counter jihadism, I peer over the horizon from New York City, looking eastward for a distance of 7000 miles. Over that horizon, I could imagine seeing the 4 minarets of Al-Azhar. A mosque and a university of more than 1000 years. That is where my late father studied, and brought up his family on the love for Al-Azhar. Why?
It has a universal message for all. Taught Islam in all its stripes, mainly Sunni and Shii. Has always been the focus of Egyptian nationalism and universal interaction. That is where the idea of American Senator Fulbright originated in the 14th century when African Emperor Mansa Musa of the Mali Empire decided on a bold course. Students studying abroad at Al-Azhar and funded by the seat of the Empire in Timbuktu. I shared that history with Senator Fulbright of Arkansas at Columbia University in 1954. He was greeting me as a Fulbright scholar. Was enchanted by the fact that his idea originated in Africa, and entered it in the Congressional record.
So the link between Al-Azhar and Africa is long and deep. Reason why its present Rector, Dr. Ahmed El-Taiyeb, a Sorbonne graduate, chose Abuja, the Nigerian capital, to address the terror catastrophe of Boko Haram. A hideous term, meaning: "Western learning is unislamic."
A total negation of what Islam (faith and knowledge) has stood for since the 7th century. Except during dark ages, not of the Crusaders (that was a passing episode); but of the Ottoman Empire. An Empire which suffered from a split personality: diversity of religions, but glorification of Turkish culture, and avoidance of modernization.
In Nigeria, El-Taiyeb's voice could reverberate through the great continent where Egyptian civilization, born 7000 years ago, was the first African civilization. And is still enduring. Threatened only by jihadism of which Boko Haram and Al-Shabab and the ISIS franchises are standard bearers.
The booming voice of Al-Azhar, uttered by its Grand Imam, who was hosted by Nigerian president, Buhari (A Muslim from Northern Nigeria) carried multiple messages. All of which are anti-jihadi. As his first salvo, he called jihadists "wrong-doers," as he quoted from the Quran: "And do not think that God is unaware of what the wrongdoers do. He only puts them in respite until a Day when eyes shall stare." (Chapter 14/Verse 42).
Referring to the wayward jihadis (calling themselves Muslim extremists is giving into their high jacking of the mantle of Islam) as wrongdoers, he went on to turn the table on them. He intoned:
- "They have placed Islam unjustly in the defendant's box; tarnishing its image; besmirching its exalted status, by blood letting, head-cutting on TV screens -a barbarism unknown before in history."
- "Search for who is the beneficiary of this mischief, standing solidly behind these crimes in the name of Islam. It is those who fund it, those who provide it with arms and other war material; those who help these groups in planning; and those who provide them with a false cover of legitimacy."
In that regard, Al-Azhar, through the voice of Dr. El-Taiyeb is heard to say: "If we are to exit these bloody crises which inflict our world from end to end, and whose victims are largely the poor and uneducated in every faith and creed, we have to chart a new course..."
"A course which begins by a question: Is the relationship between Islam and other religions based on tension, suspicion, and foreboding? No!! In the Quran, Islam is not only the name of a certain faith. Islam is the name of a common faith which all believers, from whatever faith, subscribe to."
El-Taiyeb's evidence? "The Quran described Abraham as a Muslim. That was thousands of years before Muhammad's message. The Quran spoke of Ismail and Isaac as they raised the foundation of the first place of worship saying: Our Lord: lead us to submit to Your Will and raise from our offspring a nation which will submit to Your Will." (Chapter 2/Verse 128).
Here the emphasis by Al-Azhar is on the connotation of the term "Muslim." Meaning those who submit to the will of the Creator. It is not restrictive, as the jihadis in their ignorance advocate, to the world of Islam alone. An important distinction, of an ideological nature in the ideological war on jihadism.
Now to the stance of the Quran on other holy books. El-Taiyeb provides a definitive response: Equal respect and parallel veneration. Citing the Quranic text on the Torah where it says: "It was We who revealed the Law to Moses: therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophets who bowed, as in Islam, to God's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law." (Chapter V, verse 44).
Followed by Quranic continuity on the New Testament. "And in their footsteps we sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God." (Chapter V, Verse 46).
As if in a Heavenly Club of God's messengers, whose membership is premised on co-equality, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar cites the Prophet Muhammad as per his authenticated tradition. By that Muhammedan tradition, the Prophet of Islam has declared: "I am the most rightful inheritor of Jesus. In this world and in the hereafter. The Messengers are brothers. Born to different Mothers. But having one faith."
What an apt riposte, a quick counterstrike, to the dark heart of the jihadis who claim that the only true religion for mankind is Islam. Embellished by the wickedness and the viciousness of the ridiculous claim of "Reserved only for Sunni Muslims." Thus wiping out the verity that in Islam, there is no Sunni vs. Shii. Except in the minds of those who use faith as a mechanism for control.
In that historic speech in Abuja, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Shareef does not limit the circle of respect and authenticity to "the revealed religions" (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). For more than half of humanity abide by Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism.
El-Taiyeb goes on to clarify the reason for the Quranic silence on all these faiths. He says: "These were religions not known to the Arabs in the Arabian peninsula nearly 1500 years ago. Yet they are included within the spacious tent of the Quran in regard to respect and equal treatment expected of every Muslim towards the adherents of these faiths."
That inclusiveness is manifest in the Quranic instruction for justice and amity towards "the adherents of every faith, every creed, and every philosophy which do not aggress against Muslims in Muslim lands." The very words of Imam El-Taiyeb in Abuja. Words which he bolsters by the primary source of Islamic Law, the Quran.
Thus he quotes: "God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for your faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them, for God loveth those who are just." (Chapter 60, Verse 8).
The above material covers only half of the Abuja speech by the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Al-Shareef. Space limitation of this blog posting does not allow for its comprehensive coverage. So in the remaining space, let us deal with the following conclusions:
- Jihadism is not Islam. Calling their criminal activities "militant Islam" is a misnomer. The word "Islam," if joined to their self-made name, would be a misconception which indirectly advances their criminal cause;
- Jihadi activity has nothing to do whatsoever with the true Islamic meaning of jihad. Jihad, in Islam, is of two kinds, both of which are legitimate. The first is internal: self-policing to avoid following one's base urges; the second is self-defense, permitted under all kinds of law, including international law.
- The unity between faiths, as stressed by Imam Ahmed El-Taiyeb, is a cardinal tenet of Islam. The principle of "TAWHEED," "Onness," applies in two directions: The "Onness" of the Creator; and the "Onness" between every faith and other faiths. The first type is vertical; the second is horizontal -universal.
Ironically jihadism which had inflicted on our world 9/11 and beyond, has its unwitting Muslim auxiliaries. Here are examples:
- In Switzerland, students shaking the hand of their teacher upon entering or exiting the classroom is a tradition. At a school in the small town of Therwil, two Syrian immigrant brothers refused to shake their female teacher's hand. Igniting a national outrage. The cantonal board of education decided against those errant students. The Swiss acted properly. But the Islamic Central Council of Switzerland opposed that ruling.
- In 2009, the Swiss, in a national referendum, voted to ban the construction of minarets. Reason: A Saudi sued the municipality where he resided for preventing him for building there the tallest minaret in the world. Because of his refusal to abide by Swiss zoning laws regarding the height of any construction, a total ban was issued. Once again, the Swiss edict was correct.
- Fear from "creeping Islamization" in all of Europe, to which millions of Muslims, fleeing from Muslim lands, is understandably rampant. In Germany, nearly one million migrants arrived in 2015. The government of Angela Merkel, against all odds, proposed an integration law this week. Its purpose is to give those immigrants a quid pro quo: something for something. A path to full employment, but a requirement to learn German, and accept local laws and customs.
- And why not? We all remember, how in New Year's eve, a group of Muslim hooligans went on a rampage in Frankfurt and elsewhere. Groping German women, in violation of every law, religious or secular, and of every custom having to do with privacy and the sanctity of the individual. Hundreds of culprits are being readied now for ejection from their hard won sanctuaries.
But the fact remains that polls indicate that 7 of the top 10 countries which view America most unfavorably are Muslim countries. It is obvious that the US/Israel strategic alliance plays a considerable role in that unfavorability. But this is not the full picture.
The issues of faith and politics cross one another at dangerous angles. Including the misunderstanding of Islam. By non-Muslims and those who call themselves Muslims, as in the case of the jihadis.
But at least, on the religious ramparts, there stands a sentinel called Al-Azhar Al-Shareef. Whose head, Ahmed Al-Taiyeb is now engaged in a shuttle of global efforts of enlightened clarification: FAITH IS ONE!!
A message which he has recently carried to Germany, followed by Nigeria, followed by the Vatican, and lastly to France.
This is where he had internalized at this Alma Mater, the Sorbonne motto of all France: Liberte; Egalite; Fraternite. With a universal application. The most effective wooden stake being plunged in the heart of Drakula -a name which is most befitting the so-called jihadis of today.
Friday, May 20, 2016
"There Is No Virtue In Ignorance" -So Said Obama Referring to Trump
He said it on Sunday, May 15. At a commencement speech at Rutgers University, New Jersey. That is where I earned a Master's degree in 1954 in History and Political Science. A great preparation for later higher degrees in International Law and International Organization. More importantly, Rutgers taught me how to do research; how religion and politics intersect; and how to learn about American economic history, as you assist in teaching it. One of my real Alma Maters!!
So here is a possibility for a con man like Donald Trump to assume America's presidency. If he does, a Trump presidency may signal total lunacy in foreign policy. This would not collapse America. America, the home of continuous innovation, through education and selective immigration, is not collapsable. It reinvents itself. Like the generation of electricity constantly in a car by simply using it to motor it forward.
Though America is now an angry place, that anger brews on the bottom. The middle and the top keep on inventing. Thus keeping the anger without much effect on global competitiveness. Just read a book by Robert Gordon, professor of economics at Northwestern University. His book, titled "The Rise and Fall of American Growth," has been dubbed "the most important book on economics this year."
I am digressing from Trump's ignorance. Ignorance in many areas, especially in foreign policy, the subject of this blog posting. In order to return back to it following couple of paragraphs. On American inventiveness, Gordon describes the period from 1870 to 1970 as "the golden age." Why?
"It was a period when the foundation of the modern world was laid. Electricity, flush toilets, central heating, cars, planes, radio, vaccines, clean water, and antibiotics." All of which and more are innovations which transformed living and working conditions."
Yet that brilliant author empirically did not prove the "Fall of American Growth." He advanced no proof that is capable of being verified by observation or experience. Standing alone, a theory is no proof.
This is a turn in this conversation at which I pivot back to Trump as a totally ignorant voice, at most in foreign policy. Worse than ignorant. Dangerous. Why?
Forget for a moment about his lack of details. Or his flip flops!! Just examine his few policy positions, which he keeps on reinterpreting to his hypnotized large audiences.
With his mantra "Making America Great Again," he looks upon that greatness only from the prism of brutal power.
Tendencies now bubbling on the surface of the American vast landscape. Where each of the fifty states, especially under the administration of Obama, the first black American President, is prone to asserting state rights. Over federal rights. Texas of today is not the only state which threatens secession from the union. It's constitution provides for that possibility.
And a Congress hobbled by inaction for deep divisions between a Republican majority and a Democratic minority; a President who is obstructed in the halls of Congress from moving most legislation forward or even securing a hearing for his nominee for the Supreme Court. Plus a Supreme Court, missing its full count of 9 Justices, three conservative Justices, one "swing" Justice (Kennedy), and four liberal Justices.
Throughout all these fissures, thrive the likes of Trump. Fissures, including an electoral system where the vote of the average citizen has to go through a more politically privileged "candidate," whose ultimate vote decides who shall be president.
Let us see how the outside world regards those Trump's policy positions. Positions which he now flips politically by softening them as "suggestions." From the country with the most enduring special relationship with America, the UK. Its Prime Minister, David Cameron calls them "ignorant." That is the Prime Minister of a major U.S. ally whose House of Commons has debated preventing Trump from entering the U.K.
Mexico's president had much stronger words. The Russians watched with amusement. The Gulf Arabs scurried diplomatically for explanations.
However, the Chinese had the final laugh. One of their intellectuals, Jiayang Fan described: "The appeal of Trump in China." He said: "Mao's worldview has found curious potency in the mouth of the Republican candidate, who shares his knack for polemical excess and xenophobic paranoia."
Not to be undone, an American humorist by the name of Aaron James has just published "The little book with Yuuuuge answers" (No H in "huge" -a la Trump's habitual exaggeration. With a title fitting Trump's common language: "Assholes -A Theory of Donald Trump." In the first word of that title, the head of Donald J. Trump replaced the letter "O."
Aside from Trump's ignorance in foreign policy, his lying about himself goes beyond being a narcissist. Ego centrism in the extreme. Witness his description of himself as "self made."
A patently bogus claim. Pretending to be an Abraham Lincoln, the facts stare him in the face. The Donald had his business career launched by a $100 million from his father. Lincoln had to flee from his own slavery at the hands of his own father. That father rented out young Abraham to rural neighbors in Indiana. (See Sidney Blumental's book, A Self-Made Man: The Political Life of Abraham Lincoln). From self-deliverance, Lincoln went on to deliverance of his nation from slavery through a brutal civil war.
Another bogus claim by Trump. On the matter of taxation, Trump unabashedly flaunted his crookedness as an American citizen. For the past 60 years, every aspirant to the presidency has released his tax returns to the public. Reason: transparency showing that a would-be president abides by the same rules as everyone else. But Trump refuses to divulge his tax returns. A Wall Street executive, Steven Rattner, has quoted Trump as saying: "I fight like hell to pay as little as possible." This bold admission stands out in contrast to Trump saying: "There is nothing to learn from (tax returns)!!"
Same bogus claim on the question of his respect for women and gender equality. In a seminal front page, continuing to a center-fold, the New York Times of Sunday, May 15, all but denuded Trump from one of his principal lies. His dealings with Miss USA contestants that "he has long fixated on and evaluated women's looks." Some other quotes and revelations gleaned from 50 interviews, conducted over 6 weeks:
A delusional who aspires to be America's President and Commander-in-Chief. On April 27 claiming: "America is going to be strong again; America is going to be great again. We're going to finally have a coherent foreign policy, based on American interests and the interests of our allies." Commented the New York Times in one word: "Discrepancies."
In his forthcoming confrontation with Hillary Clinton, he again uses the feminist card. But, as usual, in a lopsided way. He proclaims: "Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don't think she would get 5 percent of the vote."
For Trump, war is global, has no borders. Thus Trump has evoked a mountain of negative comments.
Summed up in the following remarks denying Trump a legitimate claim to becoming a safe Commander In Chief:
So here is a possibility for a con man like Donald Trump to assume America's presidency. If he does, a Trump presidency may signal total lunacy in foreign policy. This would not collapse America. America, the home of continuous innovation, through education and selective immigration, is not collapsable. It reinvents itself. Like the generation of electricity constantly in a car by simply using it to motor it forward.
Though America is now an angry place, that anger brews on the bottom. The middle and the top keep on inventing. Thus keeping the anger without much effect on global competitiveness. Just read a book by Robert Gordon, professor of economics at Northwestern University. His book, titled "The Rise and Fall of American Growth," has been dubbed "the most important book on economics this year."
I am digressing from Trump's ignorance. Ignorance in many areas, especially in foreign policy, the subject of this blog posting. In order to return back to it following couple of paragraphs. On American inventiveness, Gordon describes the period from 1870 to 1970 as "the golden age." Why?
"It was a period when the foundation of the modern world was laid. Electricity, flush toilets, central heating, cars, planes, radio, vaccines, clean water, and antibiotics." All of which and more are innovations which transformed living and working conditions."
Yet that brilliant author empirically did not prove the "Fall of American Growth." He advanced no proof that is capable of being verified by observation or experience. Standing alone, a theory is no proof.
This is a turn in this conversation at which I pivot back to Trump as a totally ignorant voice, at most in foreign policy. Worse than ignorant. Dangerous. Why?
Forget for a moment about his lack of details. Or his flip flops!! Just examine his few policy positions, which he keeps on reinterpreting to his hypnotized large audiences.
With his mantra "Making America Great Again," he looks upon that greatness only from the prism of brutal power.
- Pledging a major buildup of the military;
- Swift destruction of the "Islamic State;"
- Rejection of trade deals;
- Arming Japan and South Korea with nuclear weapons;
- Disbanding, then putting together again, NATO;
- Calling on allies to pay for their own defense;
- Announcing his intention to scuttle the Iran nuclear deal;
- Forcing Mexico to pay for his planned construction of a wall on its border with the US;
- Calling for a take-over by force of Middle Eastern oil;
- Insulting China daily for "ripping off America," while praising Putin's policy of force;
- Advocating America's renunciation of its debts to other nations, and
- Looking upon 1.7 billion Muslims as potential terrorists. Thus banning their entry into America "until we figure out what the hell is going on."
Tendencies now bubbling on the surface of the American vast landscape. Where each of the fifty states, especially under the administration of Obama, the first black American President, is prone to asserting state rights. Over federal rights. Texas of today is not the only state which threatens secession from the union. It's constitution provides for that possibility.
And a Congress hobbled by inaction for deep divisions between a Republican majority and a Democratic minority; a President who is obstructed in the halls of Congress from moving most legislation forward or even securing a hearing for his nominee for the Supreme Court. Plus a Supreme Court, missing its full count of 9 Justices, three conservative Justices, one "swing" Justice (Kennedy), and four liberal Justices.
Throughout all these fissures, thrive the likes of Trump. Fissures, including an electoral system where the vote of the average citizen has to go through a more politically privileged "candidate," whose ultimate vote decides who shall be president.
Let us see how the outside world regards those Trump's policy positions. Positions which he now flips politically by softening them as "suggestions." From the country with the most enduring special relationship with America, the UK. Its Prime Minister, David Cameron calls them "ignorant." That is the Prime Minister of a major U.S. ally whose House of Commons has debated preventing Trump from entering the U.K.
Mexico's president had much stronger words. The Russians watched with amusement. The Gulf Arabs scurried diplomatically for explanations.
However, the Chinese had the final laugh. One of their intellectuals, Jiayang Fan described: "The appeal of Trump in China." He said: "Mao's worldview has found curious potency in the mouth of the Republican candidate, who shares his knack for polemical excess and xenophobic paranoia."
Not to be undone, an American humorist by the name of Aaron James has just published "The little book with Yuuuuge answers" (No H in "huge" -a la Trump's habitual exaggeration. With a title fitting Trump's common language: "Assholes -A Theory of Donald Trump." In the first word of that title, the head of Donald J. Trump replaced the letter "O."
Aside from Trump's ignorance in foreign policy, his lying about himself goes beyond being a narcissist. Ego centrism in the extreme. Witness his description of himself as "self made."
A patently bogus claim. Pretending to be an Abraham Lincoln, the facts stare him in the face. The Donald had his business career launched by a $100 million from his father. Lincoln had to flee from his own slavery at the hands of his own father. That father rented out young Abraham to rural neighbors in Indiana. (See Sidney Blumental's book, A Self-Made Man: The Political Life of Abraham Lincoln). From self-deliverance, Lincoln went on to deliverance of his nation from slavery through a brutal civil war.
Another bogus claim by Trump. On the matter of taxation, Trump unabashedly flaunted his crookedness as an American citizen. For the past 60 years, every aspirant to the presidency has released his tax returns to the public. Reason: transparency showing that a would-be president abides by the same rules as everyone else. But Trump refuses to divulge his tax returns. A Wall Street executive, Steven Rattner, has quoted Trump as saying: "I fight like hell to pay as little as possible." This bold admission stands out in contrast to Trump saying: "There is nothing to learn from (tax returns)!!"
Same bogus claim on the question of his respect for women and gender equality. In a seminal front page, continuing to a center-fold, the New York Times of Sunday, May 15, all but denuded Trump from one of his principal lies. His dealings with Miss USA contestants that "he has long fixated on and evaluated women's looks." Some other quotes and revelations gleaned from 50 interviews, conducted over 6 weeks:
- On his public treatment of women: "degrading;"
- "unwelcome romantic advances, unending commentary on the female form;"
- "unsettling workplace conduct;"
- "contradictory portrait of a wealthy, well-known and provocative man;"
- "Trump had the power, and the women did not;"
- "Mr. Trump frequently sought assurances -at times from strangers -that the women in his life were beautiful."
- About his own daughter, Ivanka, he asked: "Don't you think my daughter's hot? She's hot, right?" At that time, Ivanka was only 16.
A delusional who aspires to be America's President and Commander-in-Chief. On April 27 claiming: "America is going to be strong again; America is going to be great again. We're going to finally have a coherent foreign policy, based on American interests and the interests of our allies." Commented the New York Times in one word: "Discrepancies."
In his forthcoming confrontation with Hillary Clinton, he again uses the feminist card. But, as usual, in a lopsided way. He proclaims: "Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don't think she would get 5 percent of the vote."
For Trump, war is global, has no borders. Thus Trump has evoked a mountain of negative comments.
Summed up in the following remarks denying Trump a legitimate claim to becoming a safe Commander In Chief:
- "When one has a hammer, everything looks like a nail;"
- "And when one's experience is limited to real estate deals, everything looks like a lease negotiation."
- "For someone who claims he is ready to lead the free world, that is inexcusable."
All these derisive comments were not limited to mainstream American press. They were the gist of recent testimony before the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, headed by a Republican, Senator Corker of Tennessee. The same party which is threatened by a Trump take-a man who was a former Democrat!!
Trump's derangement knows no end. A distemper magnified falsely into foreign policy. Seeking the headlines, he pays a televised visit to Henry Kissinger -the father of foreign interventionism. And holding an olive branch to North Korea by declaring that he could win them over by one phone call.
As he closes the gap in American polls with his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, I can imagine lots of foreign ministries closing the file on constructive discourse with Washington, D.C. Except for those who see in Trump's occupancy of the Oval Office an opportunity to ally themselves with his lunacy.
Nothing that Trump has said could outmatch his idiotic buffoonery in the tragic case of the disappearance of EgyptAir flight MS 804 over the Mediterranean. Upon its happening, he was the only voice to declare it "an act of Islamic terrorism." For him, it is a waste of time to await the results of expert investigation. It seems that no human event, including simultaneous and tragic death, is but an occasion for cheap political exploitation.
Judging by the moronic conduct of Trump, it is no surprise that the title of the best recently-published book on the America of the age of Trump is: "The Fractured Republic," by Yuval Levin.
An apt diagnosis of a period of bluster and saber rattling in an America where even Congress has only 16% of approval rating. "There is no virtue in ignorance." How apt!!
An apt diagnosis of a period of bluster and saber rattling in an America where even Congress has only 16% of approval rating. "There is no virtue in ignorance." How apt!!
Friday, May 13, 2016
Attacks On The New Egypt Are Not Only By Terrorists But Also By Egyptian Journalists
A mirror case is that of the Saudi islands of Tiran and Sanafir. For it mirrors a malaise in Egyptian media, as they lie or obfuscate under a new cover. That is the cover of the "freedom of expression." Also known as "the freedom of the press," born in the vortex of the two companion revolutions: January 25, 2011 and June 30, 2013.
There are limits to every freedom, and frameworks for every right. The freedom context is of two layers: the lower is that of the individual; the higher is that of the community. No freedom can be without limits. And no expression is to be protected regardless of its contents. The very term "protected speech" indicates that there are limits to that freedom.
In regard to Tiran and Sanafir, that reasonable limitation on the freedom of expression has been massively breached. The perpetrators are the very journalists who are required to observe it. For the following reasons:
Samples of the provocative themes adopted by a media that lacks the honor of its profession are the following:
We haven't even touched upon the issue of aid to Egypt from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. All benefactors by the billions of dollars for funding of Sinai and other projects. Those Gulf allies of the New Egypt, in March 2015 have each offered $4 billion in investments in Egypt.
Respect by Egypt of the Saudi/Egyptian agreement of 1950 for the temporary administration by Egypt of Tiran and Sanafir has nothing to do with Arab aid. The nay-sayers make that idiotic linkage.
In rebuttal, I, as a defense attorney who is still in active practise, posit this hypothetical:
If Egypt is in the practise of giving up territory for financial aid, then I must pose this question: Why not give up, say, Marsa Matrouh, to America's fifth fleet for the annual $1.3 Billion allocated by Washington to Cairo since the signing of the Egypt/Israel Peace Treaty of 1979?
While April witnessed the Egyptian media false campaign for the Egyptianization of the Saudi islands in the Gulf of Aqaba, May 1st registered more grievous stances by the same outlets.
On that day, the police pursued two journalists against whom judicial subpoenas had been issued for acts contravening the law. That hot pursuit led the pursuing officers into the headquarters of the Journalists Syndicate in downtown Cairo. From the circumstance, it was obvious that the fleeing suspects were under the false impression that that building afforded them, immunity from the long arm of the law.
Following that lawful arrest, the council of the Journalists Syndicate, issued on May 4 a collective protest against what that group characterized as "an invasion."
It labelled that lawful police action as a dictatorial attempt by the Ministry of Interior to muzzle the press. Most of the newspapers called for the resignation of the Interior Minister. Some even called for an apology by President El-Sisi. And the editorials throughout the first week of May were nothing but a parade of public incitement to open revolt.
The shrill voices which have attempted to rewrite international law in claiming two Saudi islands for Egypt, are the same voices who, out of ignorance of the law of immunities, are bestowing immunity on that building as if it were a foreign embassy.
Immunity is generally defined as an exemption from prosecution. And "hot pursuit" by the State for the apprehension of two suspects fleeing from a lawful warrant is integral to the police powers of any sovereign State.
The ugly face of ignorance with regard to the freedom of expression in the New Egypt has been unveiled. Unveiled in early April in the issue of Tiran and Sanafir, and again unveiled in early May in the issue of the two journalists escapees. Amr Badr and Mahmoud Al-Saqqa. In a false pretense to immunity. And in between those fatal dates, there are numerous violations of the recently-enacted law regulatory of public demonstrations.
Under all laws, aiding a fugitive, as happened by the Journalists Syndicate, is criminalized. This comes under the two legal theories of obstruction of justice and co-conspiracy.
Egyptian media have encouraged those violations by depicting Tiran and Sanafir as a sell-out by El-Sisi to King Salman of Saudi Arabia. Those demonstrations, though sparsely attended, depicted the demonstrations regulation as infringing the freedom of expression.
In all countries where The Rule of Law governs, there is a basic framework for public demonstrations. In law schools in the US, we explain that framework in three words: Time, Place and Manner.
The licensing authority specifies the time (limited); the place to be away from access to public institutions; and the manner never to be destruction and hooliganism.
On that basis, those who advocate endless demonstrations, anywhere, and to do anything are scofflaws and anarchists.
Up till now, the real problem for the New Egypt with respect to the freedom of expression could be traced to the absence of real media. It seems that the role of the Egyptian media in the creation of an informed public opinion's gone.
Now there is little left for the New Egypt to safeguard its gains but to fashion a Code of Honor for its indigenous media. Including the requirement to learn, think, and think again before you put pen to paper. For freedom cannot exist without limitations defined by law and practise.
The world news headline: "French police attack demonstrations against regressive labor law. Commented an Egyptian lady scholar, Dr. Nadia Elshazly, quoting Alex Lantier:
"No outcry from the world media, nor any of the human rights organizations, against the French law which regulates demonstrations."
Truth of the matter is this: Journalism is an honorable profession. But in the New Egypt, it has become a profession devoid of honor!!
There are limits to every freedom, and frameworks for every right. The freedom context is of two layers: the lower is that of the individual; the higher is that of the community. No freedom can be without limits. And no expression is to be protected regardless of its contents. The very term "protected speech" indicates that there are limits to that freedom.
In regard to Tiran and Sanafir, that reasonable limitation on the freedom of expression has been massively breached. The perpetrators are the very journalists who are required to observe it. For the following reasons:
- Journalism is a public trust. Its role is to investigate, and report accurately. Because those requirements are the bases for their licenses.
- In return, the State has the duty to protect the public from being infected by biased national journalism. No State, especially the New Egypt, which is transitioning from dictatorship (military from 1952-2011; then Islamist from 2012-2013), can move forward, with its media thriving on the business of lying to the public.
- That explains why the media, in any orderly society, try to police itself. Self-policing for that profession goes by the name of "the code of professional honor." Whatever exists in Egypt of today has not been manifest in the case of Tiran and Sanafir.
Samples of the provocative themes adopted by a media that lacks the honor of its profession are the following:
- "Oppression shall not create a successful regime;"
- "Freedoms in Egypt are in retreat following two revolutions;"
- "The Journalists Syndicate is subjected by the Interior Ministry to increasing violations against its members;"
- "Rumors regarding disaffection within the Armed Forces because of returning the islands to Saudi Arabia;"
- "Saudi Arabia is reembarking upon cooperation with Israel in joint projects in the whole region;"
- "Is there a threat to the Suez Canal resulting from returning the two islands to Saudi Arabia?;"
- "Has the Egyptian Saudi joint committee on the islands taken these issues into account?;"
- "Why has the Saudi flag been flown in many parts of Cairo on the national occasion of April 25, commemorating the liberation of Sinai?;"
- "Why has the Shura (consultative) Council in Saudi Arabia approved the delimitation of the Egyptian/Saudi boundaries on the very day of Egyptian commemoration of the liberation of Sinai?;"
- "The angry Egyptian youth shall not return from their demonstrations without getting definitive assurances that Egyptian territory has not been surrendered;" and
- "The purpose of demonstrations is to exercise the freedom of expression" on the Friday called "Land Day."
- Attacks on the legitimacy of the post-Islamist presidency and governance;
- Calls for outright mobocracy intended to undo the painful progress of Egypt towards normalcy;
- A total misunderstanding, in fact proverbial ignorance, of the meaning of freedom;
- Incitement to disaffection, including defection in the armed forces, the only historical cohesive national institution in Egypt;
- Impugning the motives, intent, and measures adopted by Riyadh and Cairo for some degree of economic integration, and for cooperation with the Gulf States;
- Crying "wolf," in a a sordid attempt to link unlinkable elements in the rightful return of Tiran and Sanafir to their sovereign, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; and
- Outright, stupid, and vain interference in the internal affairs of a proud, benevolent sister State -Saudi Arabia.
- Reviewing the legitimacy of those licenses issued by the State and/or the syndicate, enabling those journalists to openly become "agents provocateurs;"
- Upholding the recently-enacted regulations regarding public demonstrations;
- Linking between the war against terrorism in Sinai and at the Libyan borders to the internal calls for hooliganism and violence. Spewed by Egyptian media which find in the new freedom a hospitable environment for subversion; and
- Realization that the failed attempts by the so-called Muslim Brotherhood to change Egypt's DNA as a secular State might find in today's Egyptian media a needed oxygen for their revival.
- Isn't it treasonous to conspire publicly against a New Egypt under a secular constitution of 2014? No doubt!!
- Is yelling "Fire, Fire" mischievously in a crowded theater, causing sta
- mpede and death, an exercise of the freedom of speech? Of course Not!!
- Has there been any damage to the image of a stable Egypt resulting from these hallucinating journalistic accusations of territorial surrender? Yes, indeed!!
- Is the State entitled, and is in fact duty bound, to put an end by legal means, to this charade of a contrived cold war on El-Sisi administration? Absolutely!!
- Under what human rights theories should Cairo act to bury that campaign of vilification and mob-arousal by voices which would have never found their vocal chords under Nasser? None, as far as I know.
We haven't even touched upon the issue of aid to Egypt from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. All benefactors by the billions of dollars for funding of Sinai and other projects. Those Gulf allies of the New Egypt, in March 2015 have each offered $4 billion in investments in Egypt.
Respect by Egypt of the Saudi/Egyptian agreement of 1950 for the temporary administration by Egypt of Tiran and Sanafir has nothing to do with Arab aid. The nay-sayers make that idiotic linkage.
In rebuttal, I, as a defense attorney who is still in active practise, posit this hypothetical:
If Egypt is in the practise of giving up territory for financial aid, then I must pose this question: Why not give up, say, Marsa Matrouh, to America's fifth fleet for the annual $1.3 Billion allocated by Washington to Cairo since the signing of the Egypt/Israel Peace Treaty of 1979?
While April witnessed the Egyptian media false campaign for the Egyptianization of the Saudi islands in the Gulf of Aqaba, May 1st registered more grievous stances by the same outlets.
On that day, the police pursued two journalists against whom judicial subpoenas had been issued for acts contravening the law. That hot pursuit led the pursuing officers into the headquarters of the Journalists Syndicate in downtown Cairo. From the circumstance, it was obvious that the fleeing suspects were under the false impression that that building afforded them, immunity from the long arm of the law.
Following that lawful arrest, the council of the Journalists Syndicate, issued on May 4 a collective protest against what that group characterized as "an invasion."
It labelled that lawful police action as a dictatorial attempt by the Ministry of Interior to muzzle the press. Most of the newspapers called for the resignation of the Interior Minister. Some even called for an apology by President El-Sisi. And the editorials throughout the first week of May were nothing but a parade of public incitement to open revolt.
- The President of the Supreme Council of Journalism, Galal Aref: "Press freedom is an inherent right for every citizen. The invasion of our Syndicate building was an attack on basic freedoms."
- The CEO of Dar Al-Tahrir Establishment, Muhammed Abu-Alhadeed: "Fabricating such provocation of the press by the regime can only mean that a big event for destabilizing Egypt shall occur on June 30 -" (the third anniversary of the second revolution which brought about the elections leading to El-Sisi becoming President).
- The CEO of Al-Ahali newspaper, Nabil Zaki: "should we expect the reinstatement of the police State which the Egyptians, through two revolutions, have demolished?"
- The CEO of Al-Wafd, Wagdy Zain: "The actions by the Interior Ministry cannot be understood except as intending to undermine the presidency."
- The CEO of Al-Masriyoon, Mahmoud Sultan: "How could the President convene a meeting with the Military High Command instead of rushing to meet with the Journalists Syndicate on the crime of invading its HQ?"
The shrill voices which have attempted to rewrite international law in claiming two Saudi islands for Egypt, are the same voices who, out of ignorance of the law of immunities, are bestowing immunity on that building as if it were a foreign embassy.
Immunity is generally defined as an exemption from prosecution. And "hot pursuit" by the State for the apprehension of two suspects fleeing from a lawful warrant is integral to the police powers of any sovereign State.
The ugly face of ignorance with regard to the freedom of expression in the New Egypt has been unveiled. Unveiled in early April in the issue of Tiran and Sanafir, and again unveiled in early May in the issue of the two journalists escapees. Amr Badr and Mahmoud Al-Saqqa. In a false pretense to immunity. And in between those fatal dates, there are numerous violations of the recently-enacted law regulatory of public demonstrations.
Under all laws, aiding a fugitive, as happened by the Journalists Syndicate, is criminalized. This comes under the two legal theories of obstruction of justice and co-conspiracy.
Egyptian media have encouraged those violations by depicting Tiran and Sanafir as a sell-out by El-Sisi to King Salman of Saudi Arabia. Those demonstrations, though sparsely attended, depicted the demonstrations regulation as infringing the freedom of expression.
In all countries where The Rule of Law governs, there is a basic framework for public demonstrations. In law schools in the US, we explain that framework in three words: Time, Place and Manner.
The licensing authority specifies the time (limited); the place to be away from access to public institutions; and the manner never to be destruction and hooliganism.
On that basis, those who advocate endless demonstrations, anywhere, and to do anything are scofflaws and anarchists.
Up till now, the real problem for the New Egypt with respect to the freedom of expression could be traced to the absence of real media. It seems that the role of the Egyptian media in the creation of an informed public opinion's gone.
Now there is little left for the New Egypt to safeguard its gains but to fashion a Code of Honor for its indigenous media. Including the requirement to learn, think, and think again before you put pen to paper. For freedom cannot exist without limitations defined by law and practise.
The world news headline: "French police attack demonstrations against regressive labor law. Commented an Egyptian lady scholar, Dr. Nadia Elshazly, quoting Alex Lantier:
"No outcry from the world media, nor any of the human rights organizations, against the French law which regulates demonstrations."
Truth of the matter is this: Journalism is an honorable profession. But in the New Egypt, it has become a profession devoid of honor!!
Sunday, April 24, 2016
In Egypt Under Nasser, Nobody Could Open Their Mouth. But Under El-Sisi, Everyone Is A Big Loud Mouth!!
This is the case of "The Islands v. Ignorance." Ignorance compounded by the herd mentality that seeks in nearly every decision by Cairo authorities a cause for a false "cry wolf!!" For Tiran and Sanafir are as Saudis as Sicily is Italian.
It took a leader like Sadat, whose focus was on Egypt, to rescue for Egypt, through war and diplomacy, what belonged to Egypt-Sinai. Like in the age of El-Sisi, an Egyptian leadership should first and foremost work towards The Strong Egypt.
Having responded, I requested the Field Marshal if I could keep the texts of the 74 questions. His response: "Son. Keep them. You are one of us." On my trip back to New York, I read the 74 questions. How penetrating? An army that reads!! It fights for Egypt. And also reads for Egypt!!
That defender of Egypt today is fighting for what belongs to Egypt. And what belongs to Egypt, as far as Sinai is concerned, is clearly evidenced by the attached map. Delineating the international boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba. Showing clearly the basis for the Saudi-Egyptian administrative agreement which was signed in 1950. Gave Cairo the privilege of guarding Tiran and Sanafir for the Saudis against the never-ending Zionist thirst for territorial grab.
That map is Swiss. Produced by a Swiss company in Bern, from whence my late father-in-law had hailed. Produced by the well-known firm of Kummerly & Frey, in 1984, in support of tourism to Egypt. In three languages: Egypt/Egypte/Agypten (English, French and German).
Could the Big Loud Mouths, unleashed only after El-Sisi became president, shut up and read the map. Maps don't lie. But lying weasels, who have abused their profession as journalists, have perfected the practise of lying. Including Al-Naggar of Al-Ahram, whose name in English means "Carpenter." The cure for his incoherence is at hand. A few good nails could fix his trap door -his big loud mouth. Followed by the map that follows!!
Just look at international maps. Because to study history, you have also to study geography. Study the maritime line in the Gulf of Aqabah: It moves north from the Red Sea to Al-Aqabah.
Ras Muhammad to the west; Ras Nusrani to the west (Egyptian territorial waters); Jazirat Tiran and Jazirat Sanafir to the east (Saudi territorial waters); Ash Shaykh Humayd to the east (Saudi mainland; end of a long road from Maan (Jordan) to the north). Then the maritime line ends at Al-Aqabah, north.
The hordes on the Cairo streets (a few hundreds, big deal) were herded there by another area of ignorance -international law. Maritime lines fall in the midpoint between two littoral sovereignties. Saudi Arabia is east of the Gulf of Aqaba; Egypt is west of that Gulf. With territorial waters filling the geographic space in between.
That principle of delimitation of territorial waters was ignored by Saddam. The dividing line in Shatt El-Arab between Iraq and Iran was formalized in Algiers in 1975. Between Saddam and the Shah. Then the Shah made a mistake. Asked Saddam to banish an insignificant cleric, by the name of Khomeini from Iraq. Saddam obliged. Ended with Khomeini establishing "The Islamic Republic of Iran" upon his return from exile in Paris.
Saddam nullified the Algiers treaty; attacked Iran in 1980 with a nod from America; waged a losing battle for 8 years. And in 2003, after the American unjustified invasion, Saddam was caught in an earthen cave and hanged. And prior to that, the Shah died in Cairo, and was buried with honors.
There is a lesson we teach at US law schools: "Pacta Sunt Servanda." (Pacts Are To Be Kept). In the Quran: "O Ye Faithful, Respect Your Obligations" (Chapter V/Verse 1).
Of course there is a pact between Cairo and Riyadh. The agreement of 1950: The two islands, under Saudi sovereignty, were to be administered and defended by Egypt. The danger was Israeli encroachment south in the waterways. "Administering" does not transfer sovereignty. It means an AMANAH (bailment), entrusted by a bailor (Riyadh) to a bailee (Cairo) until the rightful owner returns to claim that bailment.
Sovereignty is not transferable, as it does not reside in any government. It resides in the body politic (the corpus), the demographic corporation, called "The People." King Salman did not come to Cairo to buy territory. He came to witness the signing of the return of the AMAHAH to his country. And El-Sisi did not surrender Egyptian territory to Salman. Cairo could not keep what it does not own. Otherwise, it would be an occupier, an aggressor against its sister State, Saudi Arabia.
Back to my zones of maximum comfort: international law, history and diplomacy. From these disciplines, I raise the following issues. To the idiots parading their lunacy on Egyptian streets or media, I say:
- Sinai itself was not Egyptian territory until ceded by the Ottoman Empire to Egypt in 1906. That cession transformed Egypt from an African country to an Afro-Asian country. That was only 110 years ago. Just examine the cession agreement. Its delimitation did not jump from Sinai south to the edge of the Arabian peninsula.
- And it does matter that the Saudi State came into being in 1932. Sovereignty does not reside in a regime. The Hashemites, under Ottoman rule, were the regime.
- Tiran and Sanafir, if not for Egyptian military custodial presence have been uninhabited. The absence of any other form of human life did not transform them to "terra nullius" (land without ownership). There is an owner -a big visible and important owner called The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In fact terra nullius, as a term, exists only in imperial parlance to justify illegal land grabbing. Akin to the Zionist fiction about settling Palestine -"People without land for land without people."
- Rightful Saudi ownership of the two islands has been repeatedly asserted following the Arab/Israel war of 1948.
- These assertions were manifest as Israel occupied the port of "Um Rashrash" (now Eilat); followed by Israeli complaints later at the UN regarding "Egyptian occupation" of the islands.
- In the law of the Arab economic boycott of Israel, enacted on October 19, 1955;
- In official Egyptian memoranda to the UK and the US regarding those Arab punitive/defensive measures;
- In the expressed desire later on by Saudi Arabia for the return of its islands to its sovereign fold, as the triggering reason for Egyptian occupation was no more; and
- In the statements by the late Ambassador Muhammad Awad Al-Koni, Egypt's Permanent Representative to the UN at the Security Council. It was on May 27, 1967, a few days before the 1967 war, when Al-Koni stressed that "Egypt has never, at any time, claimed that these two islands were part of its sovereign territory." I was there in the Council chamber when the remarkable diplomat, Al-Koni, in his exquisite French language, and gleaming shiny head, read his historic statement.
So the Saudi/Egyptian agreement of April 2016, regarding a land bridge between the two sister States, was a positive step between two sister-States. Two sovereigns, engaged in inter-Arab economic integration. The very step which the fragmented Arab world needs today in this darkening age of terrorism and fragmentation. Caused primarily by ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and their affiliates and terror proxies in Gaza and elsewhere.
The protests raised by Egyptian media qualifying that historic measure of mapping Arab borders on land and in the sea by Arab hands, are utterly repulsive. Shrill voices, from which I select the following utter nonsense dated April 14, 2016:
- In Al-Shorook newspaper, Fahmi Howreidi claims: "The Egyptian side is to blame for national anger. That side is the party which decided to relinquish the two islands and attach them to Saudi sovereignty."
- In "Al-Misriyoun," its Chief Editor Mahmoud Sullam heatedly argues:"How dare President El-Sisi call on us not to dwell upon the islands matter? Are we his pupils or are we in a military encampment?"
- In a crescendo of total absurdity, another so-called writer by the name of Ashraf Al-Barbari claims the prize of "Ignorant Cum Laude." For he attacks the decision on the following idiotic bases: a) sovereignty over the islands should have been arbitrated; b) Friday, April 8, the date of the Saudi/Egyptian agreement should be called Black Friday. Egypt's cession of the islands to Saudi Arabia was a huge shock as it caused young Egyptians to lose their national compass; c) For decades our history books have stressed that no Egyptian territory should be given up. Mr. Al-Barbari: please show us which history books offer this advice which is a total abstraction? Like defining the word "water" by the word "water!!"
- In Al-Masri Al-Youm," Hamdy Rizk calls on the Egyptian Parliament to nullify that agreement in fulfillment of its national obligations. Mr. Rizk: It behooves you to learn that Parliament has no say in purely administrative matters framed within prior accords.
- In "Al-Tahrir," Nasser Arraq claims that the speed of reaching that agreement, without first engaging the public in it before signing on it, manifests utter disregard for the popular will. Sir: This is not a plebiscite!;
- In "Vito,"Abdel-Qadir Shuhaib attacks El-Sisi for "covering up for 8 months" those negotiations with Saudi Arabia. Dismissively he tells El-Sisi to treat Egyptian public opinion with respect as it is unacceptable to conspire against it in a game of deception.
Egyptophobia and misreading of history in plain sight were also reflected in the blog by a pro-Nasser Lebanese American. His name is Assad Abu-Khalil, professor at California State University at Stanislaus. In his "Angry Arab News Service," he promoted a lie connected to King Salman's visit to Egypt: "The statue of Ibrahim Pasha in Cairo was placed under a shroud." Claimed reason: He led the Egyptian charge against the Wahabbis in Najd, in the Arabian peninsula in 1819.
Yet my contacts in Cairo informed me that "Salman's visit had nothing to do with the renovation work on the statue." When Abu-Khalil was contacted for retraction, he declined. According to the Los Angeles Times, that Professor's blog is "Known for its sarcasm but knowledgeable commentary. Is being consistently pro-Nasser and anti-El-Sisi."
This is ideological misrepresentation unbecoming an Arab-American professor at a major American university. For ideology is a partisan advocacy. It is not teaching. Particularly when it comes to the malady of hate, which is floating hostility. A form of mental constipation.
I do my best to judge leaders by their degree of dedication to the national interest. With that measure, and judging by the storm over Tiran and Sanafir, I raise the following queries about Nasserism in action in foreign affairs:
Has Nasser ever been elected through the process of "one person, one vote," or by any other democratic formula? No!! And where were the Egyptian voices which were raised in protest against his policies which led to:
- The break-up of the Nile Valley, North (Egypt) from the Nile Valley, South (the Sudan); or
- The authoritarian unification between Egypt and Syria (1958-1961). And its collapse, largely because Nasser's surrogates in Syria (Amer and Al-Sarraj) converted Syria into a police State.
- And when did Nasser involve the nation in consultation before embarking upon other existential decisions? Like expelling the UN Blue Helmets from the Egyptian-Israeli lines of demarcation? Thereby providing Israel with the pretext to strike on June 5, 1967.
- Then, following that greatest Arab military defeat in modern history, mournfully lamenting: "We expected the enemy to come from the east, but they came from the west!!" Historically laughable, especially coming from a military leader!!
- Nearly the entire Egyptian air force, sitting on the ground, was wiped out in 3 hours! Sinai was occupied - Again!! So were Gaza, the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. Until today, with the exception of Sinai, liberated from Israeli occupation by Sadat. The future of these other Arab areas is still in doubt. Including Jerusalem.
- And under what Egyptian circumstances was that most humbling of Arab defeats took place?
- Nearly a 100,000 Egyptian army recruits were marched to Yemen by Nasser as of 1962. To be inserted into a Yemeni civil war. What for? Not for any reason of Egyptian defense or development. It was for ideological reasons of Nasser's making. Pitting in its wake Egypt against Saudi Arabia whose southern cities were bombed by the Egyptian air force.
It took a leader like Sadat, whose focus was on Egypt, to rescue for Egypt, through war and diplomacy, what belonged to Egypt-Sinai. Like in the age of El-Sisi, an Egyptian leadership should first and foremost work towards The Strong Egypt.
So I ask again, where were the voices of open and noisy protest against Nasser? Who was aided and abetted by his "Philosopher of the Revolution," Muhammad Hassanain Heykal. It was Nasser who was the historic loser of Arab territory!!
In the Tiran-Sanafir issue, Egyptian media uncovered for me an Egyptian perceptional fault line: The dictator who loses territory is reverently called "The Eternally-Remembered" (Khalid Al-Zikr). But the openly-elected leader, El-Sisi, is vilified in the post-dictatorship era as "a sell out." For respecting Cairo contractual obligations. How ironic!!
In the Tiran-Sanafir issue, Egyptian media uncovered for me an Egyptian perceptional fault line: The dictator who loses territory is reverently called "The Eternally-Remembered" (Khalid Al-Zikr). But the openly-elected leader, El-Sisi, is vilified in the post-dictatorship era as "a sell out." For respecting Cairo contractual obligations. How ironic!!
History cannot be invented. It can only be recorded and reported. So back to the shrill voices within Egypt against El-Sisi. The leader who saved Egypt from a bloody civil war. The leader who cut Islamist fascism down to size. I have never met him. He doesn't know me. But I know him through his actions and plans for "The Strong State." That is enough for me.
On the issue of water and Al-Nahdha Dam in Ethiopia. The emboldened but vain voices say that El-Sisi's stand is another sell-out. Ignorance!! Ethiopia is a sovereign State developing its resources. Same as in the case of the Aswan High Dam. The 1929 water treaty was a colonial creature. Treaties, like contracts, are subject to change. "The Contracts Theory of Changing Circumstances!!"
The only voice raised in favor of a Nilotic alliance (Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, Congo) has been that of the Coptic Church. Ethiopian clergy were "created" in Alexandria. Those Popes looked upon Egypt, and rightly so, as a "Nilotic State."
But in the Nasser era, it was "Hail to the Southern Province" (the Northern being Syria). And in the Morsi era, Hamdan Sabbahi called for bombing Ethiopia on the issue of Al-Nahdha Dam. A bravado voice of the insane. El-Sisi resorted to diplomacy through the modern doctrine of functionalism. Sharing the wealth. Particularly now that the Sudan, as a possible Great South, is no more. The future lies not in warring on Ethiopia.But on friendship with Addis Ababa. And in hopefully developing the White Nile in cooperation with Khartoum and South Sudan.
Even an open dialogue by El-Sisi with representatives of civil society, unimaginable under Nasser, was the subject of media derision. By the pens which have found their ink only after July 3, 2013.
On April 13, El-Sisi told that conclave:
- "The military establishment has taught us to fear for our country and its people, respecting every grain of sand in it. We do not sell our territory to anyone, nor do we usurp the rights of anyone."
- "I am an honest Egyptian who is not for sale; who did not conspire against anyone; who did not deceive anyone. The Supreme Command of the Armed Services did not conspire against the Muslim Brotherhood. We dealt with former President Muhammad Morsi honorably, with honesty and respect." Of course they did. For 3 fateful days, from June 30 to July 3, 2013, El-Sisi tried to coax Morsi towards a new beginning. Through a fresh plebiscite. Morsi and the Brotherhood's Guidance Bureau, gave those efforts thumbs down.
The great historian Jamal Hamdan, with knowledge and clarity, on April 13 contributed to the undeniable verdict: "The Islands Belong To Saudi Arabia." The 3rd of his iconic 4 volumes in Arabic on "Egypt's Personality" bears an interesting title. "The Genius of Geography" (Aabqariyyat Al-Makan).
In the foolish attacks by Egyptian media persons, one finds total ignorance of that "genius," compounded by falsification.
In a lunatic desire to get the mobs aroused. The very hordes which paralyzed Egypt for months. Besieging, among other establishments "The Journalists Syndicate."
In the foolish attacks by Egyptian media persons, one finds total ignorance of that "genius," compounded by falsification.
In a lunatic desire to get the mobs aroused. The very hordes which paralyzed Egypt for months. Besieging, among other establishments "The Journalists Syndicate."
All of the journalists named above have a debased auxiliary. Examples: Adel Al-Sanhouri in "Al-Yom Al-Sabee" (seeing in the agreement of April 11 haste and a cover-up); Karam Jabr, also in the same paper (the Government failed in educating the public); and Muhammad Al-Shebrawi in "Al-Shaab" (What happened to Egypt's independence?). Let alone: "What was the hurry for concluding the April 11 agreement?" Al-Shebrawi, you are a rare genius: It was in the making for 18 years!!
Even those who are not advocating an outright falsehood of Egyptian sovereignty over Tiran and Sanafir are espousing other ridiculous approaches to that non-issue.
You find the same absence of legal knowledge or historical facts plainly manifest in Al-Ahram. In an article by Gamal Zahran, he calls the protests against the Egyptian-Saudi Agreement a "Fitna" (insurrection). Claiming in tortured logic that those protests are not directed towards El-Sisi. But towards the surrender of the islands. If that is the Zahran defense of El-Sisi, may I never have Gamal Zahran as my defense attorney.
Real Big Loud Mouths, a deplorable phenomenon of the post-El-Sisi elevation to the presidency. Loud barks never heard during the age of Nasser of imposed silence.
And about learning through reading. Officers of Egyptian armed forces read. How do I know that? My proof here was provided to me in 1974 by the late Field Marshal Ahmed Ismail. After the October war, he contacted me with an invitation: "I need you to present a general lecture at the Cairo Military Academy." I immediately booked a flight: New York/Cairo.
There were 500 senior officers from all branches of the Armed Forces. Including Al-Gamassi and Abu-Ghazaleh. I sat on the rostrum flanked by Ahmed Ismail to the right, and the Academy's commander to the left. My presentation was on "strategy" which I had taught in New York to large groups of US Army officers -during Vietnam. Lessons, learnt by me in Algeria during the war for independence. As spokesman for the UN.
When finished with my presentation, Ahmed Ismail called for questions to be written, and recruits to collect those pieces of paper. Then instructed the Academy's Commander to organize 74 written questions into 6 themes. Saying: "Our guest shall answer those themes, because I am escorting him today to our Northern Command in Alexandria."
- Makram Muhammad Ahmed, in Al-Watan, calls for an Egyptian Parliamentary review of the April agreement. His purpose: delineating the maritime line between Saudi Arabia and Egypt. A silly argument (in law, meaning nudum factum -without factual merit). As it makes Egyptian military presence on those two rocks a nexus to Egyptian sovereignty.
You find the same absence of legal knowledge or historical facts plainly manifest in Al-Ahram. In an article by Gamal Zahran, he calls the protests against the Egyptian-Saudi Agreement a "Fitna" (insurrection). Claiming in tortured logic that those protests are not directed towards El-Sisi. But towards the surrender of the islands. If that is the Zahran defense of El-Sisi, may I never have Gamal Zahran as my defense attorney.
Real Big Loud Mouths, a deplorable phenomenon of the post-El-Sisi elevation to the presidency. Loud barks never heard during the age of Nasser of imposed silence.
One more thought: The recalled President Morsi opened into Sinai the gates (they call them tunnels) of Hamsawi occupation of Sinai. Under the deceptive label of "Arab brotherhood." That encroachment upon Egyptian sovereignty lies largely today at the root of terrorism in Sinai.
Morsi also gave the nod to the Islamist rule in the Sudan: Shalatin and Halayeb.
No, Dr. Morsi: Shalatin and Halayeb are north of the 22nd parallel. A straight line from Libya to the west, to the Red Sea to the east. Their case is the flip side of Tiran and Sanafir. The latter were entrusted to Egypt by their sovereign owner for administration. Shalatin and Halayeb were entrusted by Great Britain, an occupier of the Nile Valley to the Sudan for administration.
Morsi also gave the nod to the Islamist rule in the Sudan: Shalatin and Halayeb.
No, Dr. Morsi: Shalatin and Halayeb are north of the 22nd parallel. A straight line from Libya to the west, to the Red Sea to the east. Their case is the flip side of Tiran and Sanafir. The latter were entrusted to Egypt by their sovereign owner for administration. Shalatin and Halayeb were entrusted by Great Britain, an occupier of the Nile Valley to the Sudan for administration.
No administrative measure could nullify Egyptian sovereignty over Shalatin and Halayeb. For these are the same legal principles underpinning the UN Charter provisions regarding international trusteeship.
Sovereignty is "inherent" (permanent): Administration is "temporary." As in the case of Egyptian administration over Gaza (1949-1967). Does not abrogate Palestinian sovereignty over it. Regardless of the length of an Israeli siege or a Hamas partisan, noisy, and troublesome presence.
Egypt is a sovereign existence for thousands of years. In contrast, its name, "Egypt" (MISR) does not even need a qualifier. For no less than 5 times, the Quran mentions its name as "MISR." The Bible vouches for Christ uttering prayerfully: "Blessed Be My People Egypt." The land and its people are one.
In the Egypt of El-Sisi, the big loud mouths should first learn their country's history. To me it boils down to three sentences: The Great Pharao Narmer (Mina), 5000 years ago, unified. Muhammad Ali, in the 19th century, modernized. And El-Sisi, in the 21st century, saved from collapse.
Now, in conclusion, I pose a challenge to those afflicted by a Big Loud Mouth syndrome. If you truly want to help the New Egypt, shut your mouth and go back to school. To learn something about Egypt's history.
And take with you Ahmed Al-Naggar, the Editor-In-Chief of Al-Ahram. For protesting the rightful reversion of the islands to their Saudi sovereignty. Ignorantly describing that restoration a treaty of surrender. The only surrender in play here Mr. Al-Naggar, should be your retirement.
The Chinese say: "One Learns From the Ear." And the Quran, in its first word of revelation, says: "Iqraa." In Islamic jurisprudence, that one word is loaded. It does not only mean "Read." Its expansive meaning is "Learn."
And about learning through reading. Officers of Egyptian armed forces read. How do I know that? My proof here was provided to me in 1974 by the late Field Marshal Ahmed Ismail. After the October war, he contacted me with an invitation: "I need you to present a general lecture at the Cairo Military Academy." I immediately booked a flight: New York/Cairo.
There were 500 senior officers from all branches of the Armed Forces. Including Al-Gamassi and Abu-Ghazaleh. I sat on the rostrum flanked by Ahmed Ismail to the right, and the Academy's commander to the left. My presentation was on "strategy" which I had taught in New York to large groups of US Army officers -during Vietnam. Lessons, learnt by me in Algeria during the war for independence. As spokesman for the UN.
When finished with my presentation, Ahmed Ismail called for questions to be written, and recruits to collect those pieces of paper. Then instructed the Academy's Commander to organize 74 written questions into 6 themes. Saying: "Our guest shall answer those themes, because I am escorting him today to our Northern Command in Alexandria."
Having responded, I requested the Field Marshal if I could keep the texts of the 74 questions. His response: "Son. Keep them. You are one of us." On my trip back to New York, I read the 74 questions. How penetrating? An army that reads!! It fights for Egypt. And also reads for Egypt!!
That defender of Egypt today is fighting for what belongs to Egypt. And what belongs to Egypt, as far as Sinai is concerned, is clearly evidenced by the attached map. Delineating the international boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba. Showing clearly the basis for the Saudi-Egyptian administrative agreement which was signed in 1950. Gave Cairo the privilege of guarding Tiran and Sanafir for the Saudis against the never-ending Zionist thirst for territorial grab.
That map is Swiss. Produced by a Swiss company in Bern, from whence my late father-in-law had hailed. Produced by the well-known firm of Kummerly & Frey, in 1984, in support of tourism to Egypt. In three languages: Egypt/Egypte/Agypten (English, French and German).
Could the Big Loud Mouths, unleashed only after El-Sisi became president, shut up and read the map. Maps don't lie. But lying weasels, who have abused their profession as journalists, have perfected the practise of lying. Including Al-Naggar of Al-Ahram, whose name in English means "Carpenter." The cure for his incoherence is at hand. A few good nails could fix his trap door -his big loud mouth. Followed by the map that follows!!
This is a central issue for the New Egypt. Its importance has prompted me to prepare a longer version of it in Arabic. If you wish to have that version, email to me your request. I could then arrange for its forwarding it to you. Share the knowledge.
Friday, April 15, 2016
When The Road To Hell Is Paved With Good Intentions: Egypt's Dismissal of An Errant Justice Minister
Beware of the Ides of March!! Last month, the New Egypt engaged in a rare administrative act: The summary dismissal of its Justice Minister. Dated March 13, 2016. Well done!! Counsellor Ahmed Al-Zind was a well-meaning person. But he has a disease. Incurable. Is called "shooting from the hip." Or diarrhea of the mouth. And Al-Zind shot from the hip, or the mouth, 3 times.
An Arab adage says: "The third hit hurts the most." So former Minister Al-Zind met his quota of imbecilities. When the New Egypt, now under reconstruction, hurts, there is little room for "MAALESH" (Never Mind).
A license for "let go," well-suited for a permissive environment. Intolerable, when the New Egypt is scrutinized in every step, in any direction it takes.
This is especially so in the realm of the administration of justice. Thousands upon thousands of cases are an overload in every court. In a national mood that uses the Court as a wailing wall. The newly-found freedoms in Egypt of post-January 25, 2011 have created a highly litigious environment. Creating a near paralysis in moving the legal calendar from "docket" to "judgment." From "judgment" to effective and humane "execution" (INFATH).
In such a fluid environment, Al-Zind found his salvation. Even before he had the exalted post of Justice Minister for his country. The very country that exports its justice models to the rest of the Arab World.
Here follow the events that fit the description of: "the road to hell being paved with good intentions."
Big Mouth Salvo No. One: While he was President of the Judiciary Council, Al-Zind, watched in justified horror a spectacle. Hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood bullies besieging the Supreme Constitutional Court. Intimidating it for having adopted a legal opinion: One-third of the Islamic lower chamber of Parliament violated election laws. So Parliament was disbanded. The Brotherhood resorted to its well-practised fascism: intimidation. Shut that court down!!
A la Nasser in 1954. That is when the cry went up: "Down with the Constitution." The great jurist Al-Sanhoury, head of the Council of State, was beaten up in his office.
As judges of the Supreme Constitutional Court sneaked to their offices through back doors, Al-Zind fumed. And rightly so. But his good intentions suffered from a dangerous absence. Absence of international judicial knowledge.
Directing a threat at the Brotherhood ring of fire, Al-Zind's fuming produced only derision. For he publicly stated: "I shall sue the Government (the Islamist Government) before the International Criminal Court." Alarmed, I sent a word to some members of the Council of State. "Al-Zind should know that there is no private litigation before the ICC. He has no standing. He does not seem to comprehend the tenets of universal jurisdiction under the 1998 Rome Charter of the ICC."
In return, I got an unacceptable response. It amounted to: "He didn't meant it!!" Well, if he didn't mean it, why embarrass himself and the judiciary, and Egypt, by making that burp in public?
And if he meant it, he should have known that the ICC litigation is not private. It is government-anchored; premised upon a decision by the UN Security Council; instituted by a directly damaged party; and to all kinds of other limitations. Primary among these is "inability" of a national judiciary to act. The so-called "subsidiarity" principle.
Big Mount Salvo No. Two: Al-Zind is now in a different capacity. Now is the time for him as Justice Minister to vent in the name of a Cabinet headed by a technocrat, Prime Minister Sherif Ismail. An engineer. The government of Egypt has put on its finishing touches.
With the new Parliament, you now have three co-equal branches of government. As per the Road Map, produced through consensus of the select national forces, including Muslims and Copts, in July 2013. Ending the reign of Brotherhood terror.
That Brotherhood had been judiciously declared a "terror organization." For its conducting a systemic organizational violence, aimed at cowing the newly regained secularism. Fronting university students as its shock troops. Under the false banner of "public demonstrations." Freedom of expression and assembly, which were violently prohibited under Islamist (un-Islamic) rule.
The battle ground moved to previously lawless Sinai. An Asian Egypt ceded de facto by Morsi to Hamas. So north Sinai was infested by Hamas tunnels. But southern Sinai has been blessed by tourism. The armed forces in the North, under the unified command of Field Marshal Askar, took the brunt of armed terror. Casualties resulted.
With that, Al-Zind's Big Mouth grew bigger. Shot again out of anger at the casualties inflicted on the defenders of Egyptian security. Good intentions. But stupid performance. Al-Zind's reaction was utterly out of line.
He declared, and I translate from his Arabic: "I will only be at ease when I retaliate by killing 10,000 Brotherhood supporters in retaliation for each soldier killed."
The opposition to that injudicious threat was swift. It came from senior members of the Egyptian judiciary. One of them was Counselor Mahmoud Raslan, head of the Legislative Unit of Egypt's Council of State. His remarks went as a spear into the heart of Minister Al-Zind's profanity. "Those words should not be coming from a Justice Minister. He is supposedly aware of the role of the judiciary in these matters."
Not surprisingly, Al-Zind verbal bomb was a gift to the Brotherhood's propaganda machine. Through Al-Zind, the odious culprit, the Brotherhood, was now playing one of its historic roles: "Poor Islam is again victim of apostates and usurpers." Foreign funding poured in; so-called "human rights organizations" jumped into the artificial fray.
And Egyptophobia found another hanger to hang its diatribes:
Enlightened anti-jihadism calls for cooperation of the adversary, ideologically and demographically. The real task is to peel off from the Muslim Brotherhood the elements which are ready to swear off violence. Integrating such elements and rehabilitating them is not through crazy threats.
The Prophet Muhammad had counselled: "Love thy friend moderately, guarding against his turning one day into a foe. And love thy enemy moderately, hoping for his turning one day into a friend." The New Egypt cannot hope for ultimately breaking up the Muslim Brotherhood if it denies itself the chance of possibly luring them back into the fold. Particularly at this phase of Brotherhood's internal altercation.
On this, I quote former President Nixon. He, the conflict-oriented Republican leader opened, through Kissinger, communication with China. His famous adage: "Sometimes if you hate so much, you may destroy yourself."
Islamic ethos was fourteen centuries ahead of Nixon. The Quran put it elegantly and succinctly: "But if they incline to peace, then incline to it, and trust in God. Indeed, He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing" (Chapter 8/Verse 61).
Big Mouth Salvo No. Three: The Prophet Muhammad throughout his Mission, suffered enough. And more suffering after his passing. Especially through the murderous campaigns of the Ummayads. Killing of Imam Ali, and his two sons, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein. In our age, every idiocy by a so-called Muslim has become enough of a pretext to attack Muhammad. And guess what: No true Muslim could, on religious grounds, attack either Moses or Jesus.
Muhammad has never engaged in any armed conflict, except in self-defence. "Unholy War" has never been an Islamic concept. It is a crusader concept. Concept for power, not for the great Christian faith of love and peace.
History is a great lighthouse - A MANAR!! It teaches unalterable truths:
An Arab adage says: "The third hit hurts the most." So former Minister Al-Zind met his quota of imbecilities. When the New Egypt, now under reconstruction, hurts, there is little room for "MAALESH" (Never Mind).
A license for "let go," well-suited for a permissive environment. Intolerable, when the New Egypt is scrutinized in every step, in any direction it takes.
This is especially so in the realm of the administration of justice. Thousands upon thousands of cases are an overload in every court. In a national mood that uses the Court as a wailing wall. The newly-found freedoms in Egypt of post-January 25, 2011 have created a highly litigious environment. Creating a near paralysis in moving the legal calendar from "docket" to "judgment." From "judgment" to effective and humane "execution" (INFATH).
In such a fluid environment, Al-Zind found his salvation. Even before he had the exalted post of Justice Minister for his country. The very country that exports its justice models to the rest of the Arab World.
Here follow the events that fit the description of: "the road to hell being paved with good intentions."
Big Mouth Salvo No. One: While he was President of the Judiciary Council, Al-Zind, watched in justified horror a spectacle. Hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood bullies besieging the Supreme Constitutional Court. Intimidating it for having adopted a legal opinion: One-third of the Islamic lower chamber of Parliament violated election laws. So Parliament was disbanded. The Brotherhood resorted to its well-practised fascism: intimidation. Shut that court down!!
A la Nasser in 1954. That is when the cry went up: "Down with the Constitution." The great jurist Al-Sanhoury, head of the Council of State, was beaten up in his office.
As judges of the Supreme Constitutional Court sneaked to their offices through back doors, Al-Zind fumed. And rightly so. But his good intentions suffered from a dangerous absence. Absence of international judicial knowledge.
Directing a threat at the Brotherhood ring of fire, Al-Zind's fuming produced only derision. For he publicly stated: "I shall sue the Government (the Islamist Government) before the International Criminal Court." Alarmed, I sent a word to some members of the Council of State. "Al-Zind should know that there is no private litigation before the ICC. He has no standing. He does not seem to comprehend the tenets of universal jurisdiction under the 1998 Rome Charter of the ICC."
In return, I got an unacceptable response. It amounted to: "He didn't meant it!!" Well, if he didn't mean it, why embarrass himself and the judiciary, and Egypt, by making that burp in public?
And if he meant it, he should have known that the ICC litigation is not private. It is government-anchored; premised upon a decision by the UN Security Council; instituted by a directly damaged party; and to all kinds of other limitations. Primary among these is "inability" of a national judiciary to act. The so-called "subsidiarity" principle.
Big Mount Salvo No. Two: Al-Zind is now in a different capacity. Now is the time for him as Justice Minister to vent in the name of a Cabinet headed by a technocrat, Prime Minister Sherif Ismail. An engineer. The government of Egypt has put on its finishing touches.
With the new Parliament, you now have three co-equal branches of government. As per the Road Map, produced through consensus of the select national forces, including Muslims and Copts, in July 2013. Ending the reign of Brotherhood terror.
That Brotherhood had been judiciously declared a "terror organization." For its conducting a systemic organizational violence, aimed at cowing the newly regained secularism. Fronting university students as its shock troops. Under the false banner of "public demonstrations." Freedom of expression and assembly, which were violently prohibited under Islamist (un-Islamic) rule.
The battle ground moved to previously lawless Sinai. An Asian Egypt ceded de facto by Morsi to Hamas. So north Sinai was infested by Hamas tunnels. But southern Sinai has been blessed by tourism. The armed forces in the North, under the unified command of Field Marshal Askar, took the brunt of armed terror. Casualties resulted.
With that, Al-Zind's Big Mouth grew bigger. Shot again out of anger at the casualties inflicted on the defenders of Egyptian security. Good intentions. But stupid performance. Al-Zind's reaction was utterly out of line.
He declared, and I translate from his Arabic: "I will only be at ease when I retaliate by killing 10,000 Brotherhood supporters in retaliation for each soldier killed."
The opposition to that injudicious threat was swift. It came from senior members of the Egyptian judiciary. One of them was Counselor Mahmoud Raslan, head of the Legislative Unit of Egypt's Council of State. His remarks went as a spear into the heart of Minister Al-Zind's profanity. "Those words should not be coming from a Justice Minister. He is supposedly aware of the role of the judiciary in these matters."
Not surprisingly, Al-Zind verbal bomb was a gift to the Brotherhood's propaganda machine. Through Al-Zind, the odious culprit, the Brotherhood, was now playing one of its historic roles: "Poor Islam is again victim of apostates and usurpers." Foreign funding poured in; so-called "human rights organizations" jumped into the artificial fray.
And Egyptophobia found another hanger to hang its diatribes:
- Security measures were unjustifiably deemed as anti-human rights measures;
- A murdered young Italian doctoral student was automatically seen as a victim of official Security forces. Even before the Italian-monitored Egyptian investigations of that tragic event;
- The propaganda machine of the Muslim Brotherhood abroad, generously funded by Arab and non-Arab sources, was gleeful at every utterance by Egyptian officialdom which could be interpreted as signs of regression of the Rule of Law;
- Even the so-called indigenous Egyptian media poured oil on the fire. A fire ignited by Minister Al-Zind. Abusing their newly-found freedom to find reason to exhibit false bravery through its own falsehoods.
Enlightened anti-jihadism calls for cooperation of the adversary, ideologically and demographically. The real task is to peel off from the Muslim Brotherhood the elements which are ready to swear off violence. Integrating such elements and rehabilitating them is not through crazy threats.
The Prophet Muhammad had counselled: "Love thy friend moderately, guarding against his turning one day into a foe. And love thy enemy moderately, hoping for his turning one day into a friend." The New Egypt cannot hope for ultimately breaking up the Muslim Brotherhood if it denies itself the chance of possibly luring them back into the fold. Particularly at this phase of Brotherhood's internal altercation.
On this, I quote former President Nixon. He, the conflict-oriented Republican leader opened, through Kissinger, communication with China. His famous adage: "Sometimes if you hate so much, you may destroy yourself."
Islamic ethos was fourteen centuries ahead of Nixon. The Quran put it elegantly and succinctly: "But if they incline to peace, then incline to it, and trust in God. Indeed, He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing" (Chapter 8/Verse 61).
Big Mouth Salvo No. Three: The Prophet Muhammad throughout his Mission, suffered enough. And more suffering after his passing. Especially through the murderous campaigns of the Ummayads. Killing of Imam Ali, and his two sons, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein. In our age, every idiocy by a so-called Muslim has become enough of a pretext to attack Muhammad. And guess what: No true Muslim could, on religious grounds, attack either Moses or Jesus.
Muhammad has never engaged in any armed conflict, except in self-defence. "Unholy War" has never been an Islamic concept. It is a crusader concept. Concept for power, not for the great Christian faith of love and peace.
History is a great lighthouse - A MANAR!! It teaches unalterable truths:
- Faith is non-negotiable. Buried deep in the heart. A snatching hand of compulsory conversion cannot reach it.
- In Islam there is no proselytizing. No evangelizing. Muhammad had nothing to do with the barbarity of the Ottomans in the Balkans. Or with Wahabbism, convoluted from a reform movement into a police theocracy. Or with the fictitious split between Sunni and Shii. Or with Muslim immigrants to Christian Europe abusing their refuge into Islamic Bantustans.
- Nor has Moses to do anything with Netanyahu's rampant settler occupation of lands allotted under international law and through UN resolutions to a Palestinian State. Nor has Jesus Christ anything to do with Western occupation of Muslim lands. He preached "love." And imperialism is about suppression.
- So why go to find guilt with the clean hands of heavenly messengers of revealed or non-revealed faiths as systems of human values? Why mix faith with governance? A combustible formula!!
- Empires also fall when minority rights are ignored. When the "Millet System" was observed, the Ottomans were on the rise. All religions were allowed to be practised. Constantinople was only interested in taxation and army recruitment. But when the so-called Islamic scholars (ulama) assumed ascendancy, minorities became second class citizens, including the Arabs.
- Thus was born the "Great Arab Rebellion." Not by Lawrence of Arabia, but Al-Sharif Hussein. He put secular nationalism above an Islam whose golden seat was occupied by a brutal empire on its way to extinction.
Ex-Minister Al-Zind, had certainly "breached the peace" of his country. His Big Mouth is what led him to the exit door for his "disorderly conduct."
If your real thinking matches your very words, I have an out for you, now that you have been kicked out of the Cabinet: Change the spelling of your last name to "Al-Zinad," (the Trigger?) Judges who know you, Al-Zind, told me that you don't read!! Good Riddance!!
If your real thinking matches your very words, I have an out for you, now that you have been kicked out of the Cabinet: Change the spelling of your last name to "Al-Zinad," (the Trigger?) Judges who know you, Al-Zind, told me that you don't read!! Good Riddance!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)