Category: Unity

06/20/12

إين خط الدفاع عن الثورة المصرية؟

أشعر انه يتم استدراجنا الآن إلي معارك ليس لها علاقة بالثورة و أهدافها. الناتج من هذه المعارك هو تقسيم كعكة السلطة بين أطراف عندهم مصلحة في بقاء منظومة الاستبداد التي ثار لتحطيمها المصريون في يناير 2011. 
كان لهتاف “الشعب يريد إسقاط النظام” في الثورة دلالات عميقة تتعدي تنحي حسني مبارك عن رئاسة الجمهورية. منظومة الاستبداد كانت ترتكز علي أربع دعائم هي:
  • عدم الشفافية: لم يكن يعلم الشعب ما يحدث في دهاليز السلطة حيث تحدد مصائره.
  • الانعزالية: كان هناك إحساس عام بالضعف و قلة الحيلة و عدم القدرة علي علي توصيل الآلام و المعانة و الأحلام ل”أولي الأمر”.
  • الهيمنة المطلقة: كانت النظام يسعي لأن يكون المتحكم الذي ليس له منازع في مصائر الخلق. كان هناك إحباط لمحاولات المبادرة الفردية أو الجماعية. حتي المؤسسات الغير حكومية كانت تعاني من تدخل سافر من الدولة في عملها و حرية حركتها.
  • تزييف الوعي: كان النظام يقوم بحملات منظمة لنشر أكاذيبه و إعطاء الإنطباع  انه يعمل من الأجل الشعب و مصالحه في مواجهة قوى خفية تريد الشر لمصر. كان أحد محفزات الثورة أن النظام فقد القدرة علي تطوير أدائه في ظل التطور الرهيب الذي حدث في سبل الاتصالات في العقد السابق.
 هذه الدعائم أدت بدورها لانتشار المحسوبية و الفساد لدرجة جعلت الحياة اليومية للمواطن العادي لا تطاق.  لهذا هتفنا “عيش، حرية، عدالة اجتماعية” في الثورة و نحن نعترض علي الناتج الطبيعي لهذه المنظومة.
 الآن نري جماعة الإخوان في أوج صراع عنيف من أجل السلطة و ليس من الغريب أن نري كثير من الثوار منحاز إلي الجماعة في هذا الصراع المحموم. العسكر هم من قتل و سحل و عري و عذب و أعتقل من بعد التنحي. الإخوان و إن كانوا تخلوا عن رفقائهم في الثورة  لم تلطخ أيديهم بالدماء (علي الأقل بالشكل المباشر).  قد يبدوا لكثيرون أنهم أولي بالتأيد في هذه اللحظة. هذا علي أساس انه يمكننا أن بعد نساعدهم في سحب كل مقاليد السلطة من العسكر أن نكمل صراعنا معهم كمدنيين أمثالنا.
 أرى في ذلك سقطة فكرية و منهجية شديدة. في قراءتي لأحداث ما بعد التنحي أري أن الإخوان هم شديدي الحرص علي الحفاظ علي الدعائم الأربعة السالف ذكرها. آري في تنظيم الإخوان الداخلي تكريس لهذه الدعائم و لهذا لا أستطيع أن أراهم محطمون لها. و إن كنت أرى في بعض شبابهم بصيص لبادرة أمل و لكن قياداتهم لا أمل فيهم و لا رجاء.
صراع القوى القائم اليوم بين الإخوان و العسكر ليس له علاقة بما أراه انه الهدف الرئيسي المستتر لقيام الثورة و هو:

بناء نظام سياسي و اقتصادي  بتميز بالشفافية و الانفتاح و يتيح لأفراد المجتمع كامل الحرية في اتخاذ المبادرات الإصلاحية و العمل لحل مشاكل الوطن بشكل جمعي. 

هذا الهدف يستحيل تحقيه طالما لم تهدم دعائم الاستبداد.  لا أري جدوي من إهدار الثوار لمجهوداتهم في “حروب رمزية” ضد المجلس العسكري أو أن يهبوا لمساعدة الإخوان طالما إن هناك غياب للرؤية في كيفية تحطيم هذا الدعائم. الأفضل هو استغلال اللحظة لرسم مسار لتحطيم هذه الدعائم العفنة و استبدالها بدعائم أكثر نبلاً و فاعلية لتحقيق أمال المصريين في إطلاق طاقاتهم الإبداعية و الإصلاحية. 
الهتاف في التحرير ضد النتائج الطبيعية لمنظومة الاستبداد لن يغير من الواقع شيئ طالما لم تصحبه رؤية واضحة لخلق نظام أفضل. المعركة الآن يجب أن تكون من أجل خلق  دعائم لنظام جديد و نشر التوافق عليه.
02/4/12

Where are the politicians?

We marched to Tahrir by the hundreds of thousands on the 25th of January, then we marched again on the 27th, and we marched yet again on the 3rd of February. In all these marches we chanted with all the strength we can muster “down! down! with military rule!” (yasqot!  yasqot! hokm el-askr!). But no one in a decision making capacity seems to be listening. 

Many protesters now believe that the standard response of those in power to any threat is to engineer a national tragedy. This is seen a part of pattern that has been going on for while now and the football massacre in Port Said is but the latest. Egyptian have plenty to be angry about and the want to bring down those who are ultimately responsible for their suffering, the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF).

A day prior to the Port Said massacre, thousands marched to parliament demanding that their elected officials take over control of the country and call for an immediate presidential elections. Those protesters were labeled as vandals by the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). The claimed, that protestants  were out to destroy the “revolution’s parliament” and are enemies to the “principles of the revolution”. Hundreds of MB youth stood guard (some even carrying tasers) to “protect” parliament and though there were many injuries, it could have been much worse. The protester are still trying to be as no violent as humanly possible within a self-organized and leaderless group. Seeking to profit from the tragedy, the MB issued a statement  about the Port Said massacre linking it to the march to parliament, as part of an “invisible” plan to destroy the state.

Since the 2nd of February many have gathered in front of the fortress like building of the ministry of interior (MOI) and started pelting it with stones. The MOI is now seen by many as the SCAF’s newly refurbished instrument of repression. There actions, or lack thereof, were the cause of the Port Said massacre. It is infuriating that not a single MOI official has been convicted for the death of at least two thousand Egyptians and injury of innumerable thousands during last year’s protests. Also since Mubarak’s exit, many more have died, lost their eyes, female protesters have been subject to horrific abuses and forced virginity tests, and sixteen thousand Egyptian lie in prison after being subject to summary military “justice”.

No one has been held responsible, no one!

SCAF generals are only too happy to continuously utter nonsense about the foreign evil plans, invisible hands, and sinister third parties. The Islamists seem to have caught the bug too. As I write this post,the toll of those injured in the past couple of days has reached 2532, and at least 10 have been confirmed dead throughout the country. 

Sadly, many western commentators are now seeing the protesters as a violent and angry rabble. The fact that they are angry is undeniable, their violence has to be put however in the context of their frustrations. What should be surprising is not the sad descent into violence, but how relatively restrained that descent is. The protesters try their best to protect public and private property, they even protect MOI soldiers who sometimes get stranded in their midst. Although the country is awash with guns, their means of violence has been of the most primitive kind. 

If the Islamist lead parliament does not take concrete measures to respond to the people’s demands and pains, then it will a partner in blood in what could unfold to be a very violent turn of events for the Egyptian revolution. Their talk of fact finding committees and assorted nonsense of putting the minister of interior on trial no longer cuts it with the people. We have had a fact finding committee and a trial for Mubarak and the ex-minster of interior running for over a year now. The parliament must be seen as agents of rapid change to civilian rule. It must grease the rusty wheels of justice. If it does not act quickly, it might spur a disillusionment with the whole democratic process. At this critical juncture the people are asking, “where are the damn politicians?”

07/30/11

Shadows of Democracy and Dissent

Freedom of expression is a the hallmark of a democratic society, and so is tolerance and the ability to live with multiple and somewhat incompatible views and beliefs.  All of this ideas were put to a serious test yesterday in Tahrir. I was happy that the day ended peaceful with no major incident given that there was an highly combustible  mix of people in the square having demands and view that are either tangential or standing in direct opposition.

Prelude to the Friday of “Unity”
The families of the protesters that had been brutally  murdered by the police during the early days of the revolution  have been calling for those responsible to be put on trial. The supreme council of the armed forces (SCAF) have been pussyfooting in making that happen, and hence many protesters gathered in solidarity with the families and started a sit-in on July 8.  They demanded first and foremost that fair and open trails must be conducted. They had several other demands that would insure that the path to democratic transition is less bumpy, such as stopping subjecting civilians to military trials where justice is handed out summarily with little or no rights for the accused.   From more on the rationale of the protesters, check out my earlier post.

“Islamic, Islamic, not secular or theocratic” the call says. It adds “Time to hear us roar”

Islamists on the other hand have been gathering forces for what they called “Islamic Identity Friday”. For reasons that remain unclear the Islamists are acting as if they are under serious threat from the liberals and secularist. Many amongst the protesters and several political parties called for calm to focus on the demands that would serve the interests of the revolution and  would not exacerbate  polarization. But that turned to be a pipe dream.

Betrayal 
The Islamist did not honor their agreement and instead came out with demands at odds with those who were sitting-in. They stressed the need for the application of Sharia in their chants. The term itself does not mean much as there are many schools of thought around Sharia and it does not directly mean Saudi or Afghan style system of government and laws.  After I had a few chats with some of Islamist, I found that members of the Muslim brotherhood (MB) had a much clearer picture of what the state should like, they seemed to embrace the notions of democracy and pluralism. The Salfis (Wahabis  is a more appropriate term) has divergent views and some of them were uncomfortable with the notion that certain basic rights for citizens and protection of minorities must  be enshrined in the constitution. Salfis lacked clarity as to what system of government they  would espouse.

Salfi sign “No liberalism, No communism, No  Socialism, No Secularism, No pan Arab Nationalism”

The Islamist generally were engaged in a muscular show of force, there chants attitude and were somewhat disturbing. Some were waving Saudi flags, others were chanting “Behold Obama, the Square is now full of Osamas“. Instead of seeking to dismiss worries about them, they were engaged in confirming the worst fears of liberals and even the majority of Egyptians who do not subscribe to any particular ideology.  They wasted a fantastic opportunity to show their countrymen and the rest of the world that they are political force that are worthy of doing business with. The fact that they reneged on a promise and  presented a narrative that would alienate  most Egyptians, specially those who took part in the revolution, is bound to hurt them on the long term.

It was quite a peculiar scene to see that while the protesters who were at the sit-in were reeling against SCAF, the Islamists made  a point of showering the head of SCAF, Tantawi, with praise in their chant. One has to wonder when he sees Saudi flag waving, Bin Laden sympathizers, expressing there deep loyalty to SCAF. Either something is very wrong with SCAF, the Islamists, or probably both.

Whilst all of this was happening in Tahrir, Egypt’s spy chief  Murad Muwafi was meeting US vice president Hillary Clinton. Speculations were rife amongst protesters that the old Islamic boogeyman card was being played. It is either a SCAF autocracy or a fanatical terrorist harboring theocracy that comes to power and eliminates any hopes of a democracy.

SCAF riling up Islamists against protesters  (by Ahmed Nady) 

On the upside
Despite everything, there was an upside to all of this. I consider it very reassuring that both the Islamists and sit-in protesters managed not to be at each others throats for the duration of the day. The degree or restraint and self-control on both sides was impressive. Many of the Islamist seemed eager to listen, engage in dialog and to try to appreciate other opinions as well as articulating theirs. Despite very differing world views, dialog was possible. A society that had no public space or means of self-expression is going to take a while to overcome decades of fear and mistrust between its fragmented elements and establish some form of cohesion.

The cause of  justice for the martyred has not been served by all of this . (By Mostafa Gamal)

Ill will and garbage 
The Islamist left the square, leaving behind tonnes of trash and ill will. Many of the revolutionaries felt violated. I met quite a few who were in tears. Some told me “we did not fight and watch  our friends die so that fanatics would come and deny us our freedom”. Many were also deeply offended by what they saw the Islamists making themselves self appointed spokespersons for their religion. The chant “where is the media,  Islam is here!” was specially offending to many who have view of Islam and values that strongly diverged with those of the Islamists. The Islamists literally hijacked several of the secular stages for their purposes. They prevented Sufis from entering the square and called them infidels.
After they left there was a some rejoicing and singing and everybody in the square was chanting for civil and non theocratic state. However, we were breathing a heavy and depressing air. The  magic of the early days of the revolution where we showed a great deal of tolerances and genuine love for each other seems to be fading away. 

07/7/11

إنطباعات عن إلتقاء الطيور الرابع: عن الإقتصاد


بداية اعتذر لقراء مدونتى عند عن عدم الكتابة عن إلتقاء الطيور الثالث الذى تم فى الأسكندرية و ذلك لظروف عملى التى حالت بينى و حضور هذه اللقاء الرائع.

كنت متحمساً جداً لهذه الندوة التى حاول فيها المشاركون تلمس شكل النظام الإقتصادى فى مصر بعد الثورة و معنى العدالة الإجتماعية و كيفية تطبيقها. المعروف للجميع ان تحقيق العدالة الإجتماعية مطلب رئيسى و كان الهتاف الأول للثورة “عيش، حرية، كرامة إنسانية” تعبيراً عن هذا و طلباً فى إعادة تنظيم المجتمع بشكل جديد.
و قد كان تجاهل كثيراً من النخب الفكرية لحقوق الفقراء و حصر خطابهم فى جدل حول مسار التحول الديمقراطى المختزل فى “الدستور اولاُ” او “الإنتخابات اولاً” سبباً فى ذياع سيط المدونة محمد ابو الغيط “الفقراء اولاً يا ولاد الكلب“. و تفاقم الحال لدرجة ان كلمة “نخبة” اصبحت سبة و كأن كل من صنف ضمن هذا الفريق منفصل عن مجتمعه و يعيش فى برج عاجى ينظّر فيه بعيداً عن آلام الواقع و مرارته. و نحن الأن على أعتاب جمعة 8 يوليو نجد من يطلقون على هذا اليوم “جمعة الفقراء اولاً”. لكنى لا ارى نفسى موافق فى إختزال اولوية العمل الثورى فى شعار كهذا كما عبر عن ذلك عمرو عزت فى مقاله الرائع. و بعيداً عن الإختزالات فقد آن الأوان للحديث عن الإقتصاد و شكله بعد الثورة و بناء ارضية مشتركة تستوعب الإختلافات و توحد الغايات.
فى هذه الندوة حاول علاء عبد الفتاح ان يتغلب على بعض المشاكل التى بدت جلية فى اللقاء الثانى من عدم إحساس كثير من الحضور بالتفاعل و المشاركة. كان النصف الأول للندوة مخصصاً لحوار مفتوح مع الحضور يطرحون فيه رؤاهم لمعنى العدالة الإجتماعية و يتم فى النصف الثانى توجيه اسئلة للمتحدثين بناء على ما طرحة الحضور من آراء و تساؤلات. و نجحت هذه الطريقة فى التنظيم الى حد كبير فى زيادة تركيز و مشاركة الحضور و تحركت حبال الحديث بوتيرة سريعة جعلتها امتع تويت ندوة حضرتها.

المتحدثين كانوا فريقان: إشتراكيون ممثلون فى خالد على و وائل جمال و لبنى درويش و ليبراليون ممثلون فى وائل نوارة و مينوش عبد المجيد. احب هنا ان القى الضوء على بعض مجريات الندوة:

  • كان هناك اتفاق على ان العدلة الإجتماعية مطلب اساسى يحب ان يتم السعى إلى تحقيقه.
  • اختلف الحضور و المتحدثون عن مدلول العدالة الإجتماعية. البعض رأى انها تعنى تحقيق حد ادنى من الحياة الإنسانية و أخرون تكلموا على وجوب إلغاء التفاوتات الطبقية الشاسعة
  • ابدى كثير من اللبرالييون توجسهم من افكار لبنى درويش الراديكلية
  • كان هناك إتفاق على ضرورة فرض ضرائب تصاعدية و لكن بعد الحضور من الرأسماليين ابدوا انزعاجهم عندما ذكرت ارقام مثل 75% من الدخل او الربح
  • بينما طالب الإشتراكيون بضرورة إتاحة الفرصة لأطر جديدة لتنظيم الحركة الإقتصادية لم يكونوا واضحيين بالقدر الكافى فى كيفية عمل ذلك. كان هناك بعض التناقض بين اهمية دور الدولة فى لعب دور اكبر فى الحركة الإقتصادية و فى نفس الوقت دعوة لعدم بناء بيروقراطية قد تقتل قدرة المواطنيين على حل مشاكلهم الإقتصادية بنفسهم.
  • وضح الإشتراكيون انهم لا يدعون لأفكار بالية كرأسمالية الدولة و نموذج الإتحاد السوفييتى و لكن هم يريدون اشكال جديدة لتنظيم الحركة الإقتصادية فيها بعد إنسانى.
  • الليبراليون اشاروا إلى ان ما طبق فى مصر فى العقود السابقة لم يكن إقتصاداً رأسمالى حر و لكن كانت رأسمالية محاسيب يتم فيه وضح كثيراً من العراقيل امام صغار المستثمرين
  • إعترف الليبراليون بمشاكل الإقتصاد الحر (خاصة النموذج الأمريكى) و ما يسببه من تذبذب و إنهيارت إقتصادية مع ما يصاحب ذلك من الظلم الإجتماعى و لكنهم رأوا انه لا خيار من المضى قدماً فى هذه المنظومة مع ترشيد مساؤها من خلال تفعيل أليات للرقابة الإقتصادية و سن القوانين التى تشجع على المنافسة و تمنع الإحتكار.
  • اتفق الفريقان على ضرورة اعطاء الفرصة و الحرية للطبقة العاملة فى إكتشاف حلول جديدة لمشاكلهم الإقتصادية و إن كانوا عبروا عن أراء متباينة فيما بيهم عن دور الدولة فى تحقيق ذلك.
  • يرى كاتب هذه السطور ضرورة ان يتم بناء نماذج محاكاه (Simulation models) لتقييم اى سياسات على الحركة الإقتصادية و تأثيرها على توزيع الثروة و جودة الحياة لدى المواطنين (Quality of life). هذه النماذج لا يمكن فى اى حال من الأحوال ان تحاكى الواقع بكل تعقيداته و لكنها فى تباينها تكشف عن الإفتراضات التى قام بها مصميها و تعطى إطاراً علمياً يتم فيه مناقشة الأفكار و تنقيحها و التعلّم من الواقع بعيداً عن الحلول الإيديلوجية المعلبة. و اود ان اذكر هنا المجهودات التى تمت فى هذا المضمار من الباحثون فى علم المتداخلات (Complexity Science) و الموجة الثالثة فى النمذجة الإجتماعية.
  • فى نهاية الندوة احسست اننا بدأنا فى الإقتراب من توضيح غايات النظام الإقتصادى المنشود و ان كنا نسعى إليه من خلفيات فكرية متباينة. ارجوا ان يستمر هذا الحوار و ان نستثمر فترة إعتصامنا المقبلة فى التوافق على هذه الغايات و لنفكر فى حلول مبتكرة لتحقيقها.
  • فى نهاية الندوة قمنا بمظاهرة رائعة من مسرح روابط إلى ميدان التحرير توحد فيها هتافنا و مشاعرنا.
06/30/11

Pain, confusion, and hope in Tahrir on the night of the 28th of June

Breakdown of trust, loss of faith, desperation, aggression, hope beyond reason, shock, pain, poss, suffering, and confusion. I was assaulted by a multitude of feeling as I was walking through Tahrir on the afternoon of June the 29th. I missed out on the battle of that raged during the night between the families of the martyrs and their supporters and the central security forces (CSF), who seemed engaged in taking out vengeance against the protesters. They CSF wanted to engage in petty payback for the setback in suffered exactly five months earlier. The video below details what has been going on.

The battle raged for over ten hours with plenty of rock throwing, teargas,  rubber bullets, and Molotov cocktails. Over one thousand protester were injured during the confrontations. The protesters were determined not the let the CSF have the upper hand. The would allow the CSF  scoring a victory over their ability to sit-in or express their grievances. For some background read this article from Time magazine, or the insightful perspective  by the accomplished  Egyptian writer Ahdaf Soueif. Official media in Egypt started to describe the protesters as thugs, agents of foreign powers, and even wilder conspiracies.    
A friend of mine who was in Tahrir that night wrote to me about his perplexity with what is going on and his the perspective he gets from being in Tahrir vs. the mainstream opinions and views :

I’m Really lost in the political opinions and the question that always come in mind “is this a revolution ? are we still in the revolutionary phase or is it time to keep going and start constructing and forsake justice and faith? Should we concentrate now on the economical state?”
I was in Tahrir June 28th I didn’t go for a specific demand, I was just driven by anger that the Central Security Forces are still treating protesters with same brutality as before.
I didn’t see any thugs, and when I came home and watch TV I kept wondering “Am I a thug ? Are we destroying the country unconsciously? Egypt on TV is so different than Egypt on Facebook than Egypt on Twitter Than Egypt on the street.

Information is so contradicting that it gets me to wonder if this was all wrong from the beginning! Or if our problem is deeper than a economical and political issues, a problem been forged in generations of cultural pollution and educational corruption, A problem that needs some sort or metaphysical higher power to do the solution for us, Should we forsake science and analysis because the problem is too hard to solve ?
I need your immediate opinion before I lose my mind!

My response was

I understand your confusion. Your situation must be aggravated by many of your friends and family casting doubt on your actions and portraying it in a totally different light.
The statement lets concentrate on X, is very silly and fallacious. It might work for one person. If X=economy and I was an economist, I would clearly know where my focus is. But if I was a student, what would “lets concentrate on the economy” mean (other than switching major)? It is quite absurd to suggest to a mother of a martyr that she should now concentrate on the economy, election, the constitution or whatever.

I follow a certain principle when trying to examine my actions. It can be expressed as follows “noble motives may give rise noble outcomes, but petty and base motives will almost certainly give rise to disastrous outcomes”. For me (and some might disagree), pure anger or hate is quite negative and pretty evil things can arise from them. However, if you were mainly in Tahrir to defend the families of the martyrs and fight against brutality, lies, and falsehood. That is pretty noble, that is something worthy dying for. The intention or motive is sometimes more important that the action itself.

I did not go out on June 28th (I really wanted to, but couldn’t), by many of my old Tahrir friends did. I respect and admire them for it, knowing what drove them to be there and their motives.
The revolution will not magically solve all the problems of Egypt in a blink of an eye. What are we fighting for then? If not a solution, then what? We are fighting for having a country that would be have enough room for all of us, whatever our social class, religious background, or political inclinations. In that society we will have the space and freedom to solve our problems, we will be able to dream of a better future and work hard to realize it. In order for us to create that free and open society there are certain prerequisites:

1. Justice (specially for those who died for that dream)
2. Transparency
3. Integrity (no lies)
4. A mechanism for collective problem solving (i.e. some form of democracy)

We seem to be losing on all those areas. If we can not satisfy those prerequisites we are are building a new Egypt based on lies and falsehood. It will be nothing more than the old rotten Egypt with a few label changes. The question regarding how do we realize those prerequisites is not a easy one to answer, and would require a lengthy discussion. Certainly we could use as much divine help as possible, but divine help only makes itself manifest when we purify ourselves and our intentions.

However a few things are certain and clear. When the families of the martyrs are ill treated or attacked, this is a clear travesty of justice and requires a serious stand and a loud response. When the police is brutal with your friends, you don’t abandon them for the comfort of your bed, but stand beside them and support them with your utmost ability. That is the decent thing to do.
Finally, we should never forsake science or analysis. We should try to use our knowledge to the best of our abilities. However, when doing so it is important to remind ourselves of the limitations of our analysis and the extent of there usefulness.

It is my view that sometimes it is better to simply stand for what you believe in and what your heart dictates than to engage in a calculus of power analysis. That is in some way a rational choice. For even when the odds seem stacked up against you and your loss seems certain, you make a clear choice that you prefer death, imprisonment, or injury than to live a life of fear,tyranny and oppression.

The revolution continues…

06/22/11

إنطبعات عن إلتقاء الطيورالثانى

إستمتعت بلقاء الطيور الثانى و إن كان قد اختلف فى المزاق عند اللقاء الأول. و هنا أود ان اوضح  ان هذه اللقاءات فى رأيى ما هى الا محاولات لإستحضار حالة فكرية  او استلهام روح معينة أحسسنا بها فى الميدان و ليس الهدف منها خلق توافق بشكل مباشر و الإتفاق على خطوات واضحة للتحرك الثورى او السياسى. هذه اللقاءات هى فرصة لتنشيط الوعى الجمعى و تحفيزه و ليس توجيهه بصورة مباشرة فى اى إتجاه. و يقوم بإدارة هذه العلمية علاء عبد الفتاح بقدر عال من الحرفية ممزوجة  بالديكاتورية المحمودة. 
افتقد هذا اللقاء الحميمية و التفاعل النشط الذى لمسته فى اللقاء الأول و ممكن تعليل ذلك لسييبن. أولاً: العدد المهول للحضور الذى تجاوز الطاقة الاستيعابية لمسرح روابط، ثانياً: الموضوع نفسه الذى تناول جهاد االنشطاء فى العشر سنين السابقة للثورة و هو موضوع -على جمالة و اهميته- لا يمثل قضية ملحة كما كان هو الحال فى اللقاء الأول. و أود هنا أن اسجل انطباعاتى:

  • كثير من المظاهرات الكبيرة منذ عام 2000 كانت تبدأ بإعتراض على أحداث فى محيطنا العربى وبالخاصة فلسطين و لكن سرعان ما كنت تتحول هذه المظاهرات إلى إنتقاد للنظام السياسى فى مصر
  • المظاهرات الحاشدة  ضد حرب العراق فى 20 مارس 2005 و الإحتكاك بقوات الأمن فى ذلك الوقت كانت اول تجربة عملية لكسر حاجز الخوف و إكشفت فيها الجماهير ان وجودها بكثافة يفقد الجهاز القمعى هيبته و انهم قادرون على “إمتلاك الشارع” و هذا بالرغم من ان   قوات الأمن قامت بإعتقال ما يقرب من 2000 متظاهر فى ذلك الوقت.   
  • الإنترنت لعبت دور مهم فى تنظيم النشطاء حتى قبل ظهور الشبكات الإجتماعية.
  • التعاون بين اليسار و الإخوان بدء فى الجامعات منذ 2005 و كان ضد سيطرة امن الدولة على الإنتخبات الطلابية. 
  • لعب الإعلام الحر (مثل قناة الجزيرة) دور مهم فى إلقاء الضوء على أحداث تم فيها كسر المحرمات السياسية، مثل المنادة بإسقاط النظام و تدمير صور حسنى مبارك فى المظاهرات العمالية.
  • نظاهرات المحلة فى فبراير 2008 و القمع الأمنى و شجاعة العمال فى ذلك الوقت جعلت وائل خليل و حسام الحملاوي مؤمنون بحتمية سقوط النظام.
  • النشطاء اليساريون كانوا فى الصفوف الأولى فى المظاهرات و الإحتجاجات و لكنهم لا يدعون القيادة. كانت الجماهير تتحرك بوعى و بتنظيم ذاتى اذهل وائل خليل و كأنها مستوعبة كل التراث البشرى عن الثورات و الإنقلابات الكبرى
  • يتفق النشطاء ان المظاهرات و الإحتجاجات قبل 2011 كانت لها دور مهم فى التمهيد للثورة. 
  • كثيرمن الحضور شعروا انهم لم تتاح لهم الفرصة لإبداء آراءهم و لهذا يجب ان نفكر فى ألية لجعل مشاركة الحضور اوسع فى الندوات القادمة و سوف اقوم بعمل تدوينة عن بعض الأفكار فى هذا المجال. 

06/13/11

إنطبعات عن إلتقاء الطيور الاول

بالأمس حضرت الندوة التى دعا إليها علاء عبد الفتاح للتوترجية (الناشطين المستخدمين لتويتر) التى حاولت ان نسلط بعض من الضوء عن تصور “الإسلاميين” عن السياسة و الحكم فى مصر. و كان هناك خمسة متحدثين رئسيين من شباب الإخوان، أربعة منهم أنفصلوا من الجماعة و الأخر مازال عضوا بها و ذلك بالإضافة للحضور الذى كانوا من الأطياف متعددة (سلفيين، لبراليين، يساريين، أناركيين، و غير محددى التوجه). 
و احب هنا ان اسجل بعض إنطبعاتى:
  • إدارة الحوار الرائعة التى قام بها علاء نجحت فى تقليل حدة التوتر و خلق مناخ فيه إستلهام لروح ميدان التحرير
  • الشباب الخمسة كانوا على درجة عاليه من التفتح و الصراحة و هذا و إن كان فى بعض الإحيان هجوم ضارى و إستنكار لمواقف قيادات الإسلاميين
  • وجدت نفسى معجب بكلام إبراهيم الهضيبى و تركيزه على أن الإسلام لا يمكن أن يتم رؤيته من خلال منظور إيديلوجى
  • الهضيبى إيضا قام بتوضيح ان الإخوان لا يمكن رؤينهم من خلال إطار فكرى متناسق و ذو إتجاه واحد خاصة فيما يتعلق بالحريات و علاقة الجماعة بالمجتمع. هناك أريعة تيارت فكرية داخل الجماعة الإن و هى: التيار التابع لفكر المؤسس حسن البنا، تيار يتبع أفكار سيد قضب، تيار سلفى، و تيار أزهرى (هذا هو الأقرب للهضيبى و يتميز بعدم إحادية الرؤية)
  • شهدت الندوى بعض التصادم الفكرى الغير عنيف خصوصاً عندما أعلن نعض من الإسلاميين عما يرونه كمسلمات لحل بعض القضايا الشائكة مثل الإحتكام برأى الجماعة و الأزهر الشريف
  • كان هناك توافق عام لكل من حضروا الندوة عن ضرورة العمل المشترك
  •  كان هناك تباين واضح فى أراء الأسلاميين فى موقفهم من الإمبريالية و التعامل مع الأخر غير الإسلامى
  • أثارت الندوة بعض الإشكاليات التى لم يتم التعرض لحلها بشكل مرضى، أهمها:
    • كيفية القيام بعمل توافق بين الحرية و الشريعة و ما هو مدلول “الحرية التى لا تعارض بينها و بين الشريعة”
    • ما هى الأليات التى ممكن ان تساعدنا فى بناء وطن يتسع لكل ابناءة على خلاف تواجهاتهم الفكرية او الإيديلوجية او الدينية. و لعل مقال علاء رؤية غير مكتملة الملامح على هذا الطريق
    • كيفية فض الإشتباك فى بعض النقاط التى يعلن الإسلاميين ان ليس هناك أي مساومة عليها
    • كيفية إعادة جو  الثقة على مستوى واسع (اكبر من حضور الندوة) و ذلك بعد ان اصبح هناك جوا من التوجس من الأخر مستشرى فى أطياف المجتمع المتعددة. 
  • تبين جلياً فى هذا الندوة انه عندما نتحدث بعضنا لبعض بعيدا عن خنادقنا الفكرية يمكن ان نخلق أرضية مشتركة للتوافق. التواصل على المستوى الإنسانى أهم من المبارزات الفكرية.  
05/23/11

Regroup Now!

We are under attack and our dreams are under siege. After a little over three months it is becoming deadly clear that certain forces are trying to outflank us, and they have already had some success. We must regroup now or all is lost and noble sentiments and aspirations that we experienced will be nothing more than a fading memory. The stuff of lamentations over what could have been and how we it let slip our grasp.

Some readers at this point might object: What are you whining about? Why this talk of gloom, conspiracy and dark forces? Shouldn’t we be focused on the upcoming parliamentary elections?

Let me first try to go over what we have managed to accomplish:

  1. We got most of Mubark’s coterie under detention and they are being tried for corruption
  2. Mubark, his sons, and wife are facing charges of corruption (though no criminal charges have been pressed yet). 
  3. We have temporary constitution that limits the power of the president, and the duration of his/her presidency (never mind that it gives the supreme councle of the armed forces [SCAF] unchecked power for the time being). 
  4. We have some sort of road map for democratic transition where we are having  parliamentary elections in September, followed by presidential elections six months later. 
  5. We have Prime Minster who supported the revolution, and who many still believe is genuinely a decent person (though many have doubts about his ability to assert the demands of the revolution). 

So why complain? Can’t we just hold-on for a few more months and get the representative parliament of our dreams and then a few more a get an elected president? The SCAF and government seem to be telling us to do just that. They don’t seem to like people expressing any sort of complaints or grievances. They even managed to pass an anti-protest law!!! Quite ironic, after a revolution. It all boils down to a crisis of trust.

Trust broken with a butt of a gun
In the early hours of the February the 26th, I stood with a couple of hundred revolutionaries in front of the People’s Assembly building. We were all gathered for sit-in, demanding that Shafik and his cabinet step-down. This was the same cabinet that Mubarak put in place in his last days and that the SCAF had kept for mysterious reasons. That night many of us were severely beaten, electrocuted, and subject all sorts of abuse. In one harrowing account of the torture that went on that night, it is clear that many in the army are still loyal to Mubarak. The army officers reveled in forcing the protesters to cry “long live Mubarak”. I was lucky to have escaped being captured, I was running and hiding in nearby streets.

The SCAF tried to deny any wrong doing and often declared that it never incarcerated any of the protesters. Their narrative does not hold much water, and runs counter to the many eye witness accounts. The SCAF has shown itself very trusting of the late regime’s corrupt figures. This was clearly  demonstrated in the appointment of the governors, many of who were from the minister of interior who were notorious for their involvement in torture cases, and others who have often spoken out vocally against the revolution.

The SCAF reputation now reeks of anything  to but trustworthiness. I firmly believe it becoming exceedingly hard to see them as honorable custodian of our revolution. Their decision making is opaque and their actions are far from comforting. It is very hard to explain how the army highly trained special forces were being used to hunt and incarcerate protesters while idling when churches were being burnt or peaceful  protesters were being shot at.

Why regroup, why a second Friday of Anger?
The SCAF has proven itself to be at best incompetent in helping achieve the demands of the revolution, and at worst having designs on post revolutionary political landscape to serve the best interests of the SCAF generals. The SCAF generals maintain massive economic interests and no civilian oversight. One can see that it would be hard for generals to abandon many of their perks for the greater interest of the country. I find it very suspicious that a supposed scholar like Moataz Abdel-Fattah tries to push forth the notion that SCAF is totally immune to ambitions of its generals and that there is something, that almost veers on the supernatural, the will make them the honest executors of the people’s will. Recalling the faces of the soldiers chasing in on February 26th and their determination to capture and torture makes me immune such flimsy (or more likely disingenuous)  arguments.

What do we do? Fire the SCAF?
The SCAF for all its sins still maintains a semblance of stability and yet we would never trade away our freedom and our revolution for this poor attempt at maintaining “order”. We are pressing forward demands that we hope will keep the SCAF straight, yet those demands are still being worked out, refined and crystallized.

Over the past few months a great deal of trust has been eroded and it is about time that SCAF pays attention to the revolutionaries and stop trying to undermine the spirit of the revolution.  I am looking forward to May27 where amongst a sea of competing memes, the best ones will dominate.

What does the situation look like now?
It is best captured in this brilliant graffiti by Ganzeer showing a taking facing of a bicycle. The revolutionaries are doing the difficult act of moving forward while balancing a bread tray over their head. The bread tray is future of Egypt. The tank (SCAF) seems to be standing in the way. Together we can force the tank to change direction, and we are far more powerful than what naive sizing up of strength may suggest.

03/31/11

Steps on the road to unity

During the last two days, I have had the opportunity to examine two groups that are concerned with building a consensus among the revolutionaries and spreading political awareness in all sectors of society. Both groups are working towards achieving the goals of the revolution which I understand to be something that is even greater and nobler than can be expressed in any set of demands. I will try here to shed some light on both groups and contrast their working styles.

The revolution youth union (اتحاد شباب الثورة)

This group is often confused with the popular coalition of the youth of the revolution (ائتلاف شباب الثورة). It does not really help that there are at least three other similar sounding groups that also claim to represent the demands of the youth.
In a meeting with Abdoulah Helmy, one of the founders, I learned that the union was formed after realizing that the coalition was a somewhat closed club that brings together a number of already well organized and well established political groups. Helmy, saw that there are many political groups outside of the coalition and a great deal of politically non-affiliated citizens that need to coordinate activities and work together towards a common goal. He started the union in Tahrir and got many thousands to signup to it. The union is amongst the groups that are frequently consulted by the supreme council of the armed forces (SCAF).
The union is a very open group and many of its members maintain other affiliations. They have a head start in trying to work towards and national dialog and to build consensus among members from a very broad ideological spectrum. Amongst their ranks are Salafis, Communists, Coptic extremest and everything in between. I was shown a draft of a set of political demands that they managed to get representatives from diverse groups to agree upon.
They want to act as a lobbying group that will throw its weight behind parliamentary or presidential candidates that adopt their demands. They build their power on an existing (and growing) network of members and affiliated groups. Their approach seems to be one that is focused on consensus building and quickly adapting to circumstances and the composition of their constituents.
The national front for justice and democracy (الجبهة القومية للعدالة و الديمقراطية)

The front seems to have started a bit later in the game, as their membership drive only started in full earnestness in last few weeks. Like the union they are an open group that seeks to build unity and a broad consensus. However, they are more focused on the majority the participants in the revolution who are not affiliated with any political group. One can clearly sense that the founders are justifiably concerned that existing political groups might try maximize their political gains while abandoning what they see as the core goals and aspirations of the revolution.

The front’s goals are:
  1. Establishing and protecting democracy
  2. Fighting corruption an demolishing its infrastructure
  3. Realizing Social Justice
  4. Influencing domestic policies and actively engaging in national dialog
  5. Working towards an independent foreign policy that truly represents the interests of the nation
  6. Acting as lobby to influence the outcome of elections
  7. Working towards national stability and security
The front have a well thought out internal organization and modus operandi.
Going forward

The existence of both the front and the union highlights that there is still something in the Egyptian Revolution that has yet to find a means of expression, something that needs to be established that none on the existing ideological factions can fully cater for.
The front’s emphasis on the political non-affiliated and “goals and principles” first approach to building unity is admirable. Equally admirable is that they seem to be more methodological in their outlook and purpose.
The union’s heroic efforts in getting ideologically opposing groups to agree on a set of concrete demands is pragmatic coup de grace against the division. The get things done by muddling through thorny issues and difficult events and one gets the impression that they are highly adaptable and initiative driven.
I hope that both the front and union would find areas where they could work together for greater effectiveness. Lets see if we can do battle with the counter revolution with a pincer maneuver.