Three weeks after ousting Hosni Mubarak, Egyptians are turning their anger towards his internal security apparatus, storming the agency's main headquarters, and seizing documents to help build a case that the service was used as a tool of torture and abuse against ordinary Egyptians.
Why is the Egyptian security apparatus so feared and hated? And what role could it play in the new post-revolution Egypt?
Why is the Egyptian security apparatus so feared and hated? And what role could it play in the new post-revolution Egypt?
Joining the programme to discuss these issues are: Hisham Safie Eldin, a former police officer; Hossam el-Hamalawy, a blogger, journalist and activist; and Theodore Karasik, the director of research at the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Affairs.
As the wave of revolution continues to roll all across the Arab Middle East, the neo-Kharijite militants of Al Qaeda have been relatively silent, as political change coming about using peaceful, non-violent protest is Al Qaeda's worst nightmare
BY HESHAM HASSABALLA, MARCH 7, 2011
|  |
| |
Proving the extremists wrong |
CHICAGO, IL |
Yet, it may be a sign of Al Qaeda's desperation. As the wave of revolution continues to roll all across the Arab Middle East, the neo-Kharijite militants of Al Qaeda have been relatively silent as of late. Indeed, according to the website Magharebia, Zawahiri was posting statements about the Egyptian revolution, but it seemed to have very little effect or influence. In fact, the events of Jan 25-Feb 11 in Egypt, coming on the heels of the "Jasmine Revolution" of Tunisia, is Al Qaeda's worst nightmare: political change coming about using peaceful, non-violent protest.
Throughout its existence, Al Qaeda has maintained that political change can only be achieved through violent struggle, which they falsely claim to be "jihad." And it has matched its rhetoric with vile actions throughout the world, killing scores of people. Yet, the overwhelming majority of those people have been innocent civilians, most of them Muslims. Zawahiri has condemned Islamist groups that seek to participate in secular political processes, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. According to Magharebia, Zawahiri "challenged those who do not share his opinion to provide 'one example' of a peaceful revolution that succeeded in changing a regime."
Well, the youth of Egypt and Tunisia have met his challenge and proven that real political change can be achieved without the use of a suicide bomb vest; regimes can be toppled without having to resort to bombing innocent people eating pizza, or buying groceries, or praying in a house of God. And, it seems, it has gotten Al Qaeda scared to death in their caves.
Indeed, the extraordinary events the world has witnessed in Tunisia and Egypt has completely decimated Al Qaeda's main premise and raison d'etre. In fact, it was Al Qaeda-like violence that brought about the brutal repression that led to the revolution in Egypt. In response to the assassination of Anwar Sadat by "Islamist" militants, Hosni Mubarak put into a place a perpetual state of emergency, allowing his security services to arrest and torture at will. After three decades of state-sponsored brutality, the Egyptian people stood up and would not take "No" for an answer.
Yet, they did so peacefully, despite a brutal and ugly crackdown by regime supporters. The weight of their dignified nonviolence was finally too much, and the regime crumbled. This must have terrified Al Qaeda to the point that their "Sheikh" Osama Bin Laden directed Zawahiri to "reiterate this matter" about attacks on civilians and urge "the mujahideen to consider the rulings of sharia (Islamic law) and the interests of Muslims before undertaking any jihad operation."
Yet, what Al Qaeda doesn't seem to realize is that this popular, nonviolent uprising is wholly in keeping with the Sharia, and their brutal violence is the complete antithesis of the Sharia. In another article on Magharebia, the calls to violence and "jihad" by Zawahiri last October were widely rejected:
"This is not the first time that Zawahri calls Muslim rulers infidels and calls for people to get out of their rule. And calls by Al-Qaeda generally do not find any echo in the community. It has become sure enough that people who respond to such calls, are people who suffer from psychological and social problems. Al-Zawahiri is known as a doctor, but instead of choosing to treat people, he chose to kill them, and this choice in itself is an indication that the mental abilities of this man aren't sane," said Driss Moussaoui, President of the Moroccan Association for Social Psychiatry.Even the Salafists in Algeria issued a fatwa banning violence against the government: "Any opposition must occur in a peaceful context and must be marked by the need not to fall into violence in any form: riots, demonstrations, sit-ins, and even insults," said Salafist theologian Sheikh Mohamed Ali Ferkous.
And judging by the actions of Muslims all across the Middle East, this view of rejecting violence is clearly majoritarian . It has been government actions - such as the gunning down of unarmed protesters chaning "Salmeya, Selmeya (Peaceful, Peaceful)" in Bahrain - that has been "Al Qaeda-esque." It has been the autocratic Arab governments who have been the terrorists. It has been Arab governments who have seemingly taken the advice of Al Qaeda by reacting to peaceful protest with brutal violence. And the most beautiful thing is, this reaction has only further strengthened the resolve to answer violence with peace - and completely destroy everything for which Al Qaeda stands.
Indeed, the death of Al Qaeda was bound to happen. This band of thugs was nothing more than murderous criminals who wrap their bloodthirstiness in the garbs of religiosity, much like the Kharijites were before them. And just as the Kharijite phenomenon fizzled, the Al Qaeda phenomenon will fizzle as well. That is because the core of Islam - the message and movement of another Prince of Peace, Prophet Muhammad - will always endure and survive any aberration that seeks to overtake it.
It is as God says: "They aim to extinguish God's light with their utterances: but God has willed to spread His light in all its fullness, however hateful this may be to all who deny the truth." (61:8) Al Qaeda, with its brutal violence and bloody actions, sought to extinguish God's light by claiming any view other than its own as "infidel" worthy of death. But, "God has willed to spread His light in all its fullness," and that meant that aberrations such as Al Qaeda were inevitably going to fail.
What is even more extraordinary is that I had always thought the main thrust against the thugs of Al Qaeda would come from the Muslims of the West. It turns out, however, that the death blow will probably come from the Muslims of the East. The barbrians of Al Qaeda are surrounded on all sides by the true warriors of Muhammad. And they cannot be wiped out soon enough.
The revolutions spreading all across the Middle East were long in coming and long overdue. It is my hope and prayer that the light of freedom and human dignity shines forth in every Muslim country all across the world, nay, every country on the face of the earth. The Arabs are no less deserving of living in freedom, no less deserving to be able to shape their own destiny. As they raise the flag of freedom and dignity, in all its nonviolent splendor, they will forever prove to all the nay-sayers that Islam does not encourage violence. On the contrary, so many of the protestors cite Islam as their motivation to say "Selmeya, Selmeya." It has been said that, on 9/11/01, Al Qaeda rose to its prominence, and on 2/11/11, Al Qaeda breathed its last. To the giant that is Islam, Al Qaeda's phenomenon was nothing more than a gnat, a fleeting blip. And its obituary was written on the streets of Tunisia and in Tahrir Square.
Hesham A. Hassaballa is a Chicago physician and writer. He is the co-author of "The Beliefnet Guide to Islam," published by Doubleday in 2006. His blog is called God, Faith, and a Pen. His latest book is Noble Brother: The Story of the Prophet Muhammad in Poetry (Faithful Word Press).
Let me state quite directly: Islamophobia and those who promote it are a greater threat to the United States of America than Anwar al Awlaqi and his rag-tag team of terrorists.
On one level, al Awlaqi, from his cave hide-out in Yemen, can only prey off of alienation where it exists. Adopting the persona of a latter-day Malcolm X (though he seems not to have read the last chapters of the Autobiography or learned the lessons of Malcolm's ultimate conversion), he appears street-smart, brash, self-assured and assertive -- all of the assets needed to attract lost or wounded souls looking for certainty and an outlet for their rage. Like some parasites, al Awlaqi cannot create his own prey. He must wait for others to create his opportunities, which until now have been isolated and limited -- a disturbed young man here, an increasingly deranged soldier there. Islamophobia, on the other hand, if left unchecked, may serve to erect barriers to Muslim inclusion in America, increasing alienation, especially among young Muslims. Not only would such a situation do grave damage to one of the fundamental cornerstones of America's unique democracy, it would simultaneously rapidly expand the pool of recruits for future radicalization.
I have often remarked that America is different, in concept and reality, from our European allies. Third generation Kurds in Germany, Pakistanis in the UK, or Algerians in France, for example, may succeed and obtain citizenship, but they do not become German, British, or French. Last year, I debated a German government official on this issue. She kept referring to the "migrants" -- a term she used to describe all those of Turkish descent, living in her country, regardless of the number of generations they had been there. Similarly, following their last election, a leading British newspaper commented on the "number of immigrants" who won seats -- without noting that many of those "immigrants" were third generation citizens.
America has prided itself on being different. Being "American" is not the possession of a single ethnic group, nor does any group define "America." Not only do new immigrants become citizens, they also secure a new identity. More than that, as new groups become American and are transformed -- the idea of "America" itself has also changed to embrace these new cultures.
Within a generation, diverse ethnic and religious groups from every corner or the globe have become Americans, dramatically changing America in the process. Problems remain and intolerant bigots, in every age, have reared up against new groups, but history demonstrates that, in the end, the newcomers have been accepted, incorporated and absorbed into the American mainstream.
This defines not only our national experience, but our defining narrative, as well. When immigrant school children in Europe learn French, German or British history -- they are learning "their host's" history. In the U.S., from the outset, we are taught that this is "our new story" -- that it includes all of us and has included us all, from the beginning.
It is because new immigrants and diverse ethnic and religious communities have found their place and acceptance in the American mainstream that the country, during the last century, survived and prospered despite being sorely tested with World Wars, economic upheaval and bouts with internal strife. During all this time we had to contend with anti-black, anti-Asian, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-immigrant, and anti-Japanese movements. In the end, after creating their moment of pain, these efforts have always lost.
They lose, but they do not always go away. The Islamophobia we are witnessing today is the latest campaign by bigots to tear apart the very fabric of America. We know the groups promoting it. First, there is the well-funded "cottage industry," on the right, of groups and individuals with a long history of anti-Arab or anti-Muslim activity. Some of the individuals associated with these efforts have been given legitimacy as commentators on "terrorism," "radicalization" or "national security concerns" - despite their obvious bias and even obsession with all things Arab or Muslim (in this, they remind me of good old-fashioned anti-Semites who never tired of warning of Jewish threats or conspiracies or who while always claiming to like individual Jews, rallied against any and all Jewish organizations).
If these "professional bigots" have provided the grist, the mill itself was run by the vast network of right-wing talk radio and TV shows and websites and prominent preachers who have combined to amplify the anti-Muslim message nationwide. Their efforts have done real damage. They have tormented descent public servants, created protests that have shuttered legitimate institutions, fomented hate crimes and produced fear in the Muslim community.
In just the past two years, we have seen a dramatic upsurge in the activity of these bigots. More ominously, their cause has been embraced by national political leaders and by elements in the Republican Party -- who appear to have decided, in 2010, to use "fear of Islam" as a base-building theme and a wedge issue against Democrats for electoral advantage.
In the past only obscure or outrageous members of Congress (like: North Carolina's Sue Myrick who expressed nervousness and insecurity because of "who was owning all those 7/11's"; or Colorado's Tom Tancredo who once warned that he "would bomb Mecca") were outspoken Islamophobes. After the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee embraced opposition to Park 51 as a campaign theme, it is hard to find a leading Republican who has not railed on some issue involving Islam or Muslims in the U.S. The net impact here is that this current wave of Islamophobia has both played to the Republican base, while firming up that base around this agenda. The polling numbers are striking and deeply disturbing. Fifty-four percent of Democrats have a favorable attitude toward Muslims, while 34% do not. Among Republicans, on the other hand, only 12% hold a favorable view of Muslims, with 85% saying they have unfavorable views. Additionally, 74% of Republicans believe "Islam teaches hate" and 60% believe that "Muslims tend to be religious fanatics".
The danger here is that to the degree that this issue has become a partisan and, in some cases, a proven vote getter for the GOP, it will not go away any time soon. The longer we are plagued by this bigotry, and the displays of intolerance it breeds (the anti-mosque building demonstrations or the anti-Sharia law efforts now spreading across the country) the longer young Muslims will feel that the "promise of America" does not include them -- and they will feel like aliens in their own country.
It is this concern that has prompted many inter-faith religious groups and leaders and a diverse coalition of ethnic and civil rights organizations to so vigorously opposeCongressman Peter King's (R-NY) hearings that will deal with the radicalization of American Muslims later this week. They know, from previous statements made by King, of his personal hostility to American Muslims. They also know that what King is doing will only aggravate an already raw wound, creating greater fear and concern among young Muslims -- who have already witnessed too much bigotry and intolerance.
What they should also know, is that in the process of targeting a religion in this way and engaging in this most "un-American activity" King and company are, in fact, opening the door for increased alienation and future radicalization. Al Awlaqi must be smiling from inside his cave.
Britain's CHannel Four has the following report on the botched British expedition to Libya this weekend. British foreign secretary William Hague claimed that the mission was a diplomatic one, rather than military, which drew jeers from the opposition. You can see the report below:
Today 8:38 AM More On Gaddafi's Deal
Gaddafi reportedly made overtures toward opposition forces today, including saying that he would step down in return for some demands. Reuters is now reporting more details:
Al Jazeera said Gaddafi had proposed to Libyan rebels to hold a meeting of parliament to pave the way for him to step down with certain guarantees.
It said Gaddafi made the proposal to the interim council, which speaks for mostly eastern areas controlled by his opponents. It quoted sources in the council as saying Gaddafi wanted guarantees of personal safety for him and his family and a pledge that they not be put on trial.Al Jazeera said sources from the council told its correspondent in Benghazi that the offer was rejected because it would have amounted to an "honourable" exit for Gaddafi and would offend his victims.
The leaders of Libya's uprising say they are considering a conditional offer from Muammar Gaddafi to step down, sources have told Al Jazeera.
Libyan state television on Tuesday denied reports that the Libyan leader tried to strike a deal with opposition forces seeking his removal.
However, a spokesman for the opposition National Council in the eastern rebel stronghold of Benghazi confirmed that a representative had sought to negotiate Gaddafi's exit.
Gaddafi was reported to have sent a representative to Benghazi on Sunday night to discuss a conditional plan to step down, Al Jazeera learned. The offer was provided on the condition that Gaddafi would be able to keep his assets and avoid prosecution.
Abdel Jalil Mustapha, the head of the opposition National Council, rejected the idea until Gaddafi actually leaves but said the council "may" consider a deal after his exit.The Libyan leader is said to be willing to step down in return for dropping war crimes charges against him and guaranteeing a safe exit for him and his family. He also reportedly wants guarantees from the UN that he will be allowed to keep his money.
"We rejected this (deal). We are not negotiating with someone who spilled Libyan blood and continues to do so. Why would we trust the guy today?" Mustafa Gheriani, a media officer for the council said.
Appeal for dialogue
On Monday evening, a leading member of Libya's ruling establishment appealed to rebel leaders for dialogue, another sign that Gaddafi may be ready to compromise with opponents challenging his rule.
Jadallah Azous Al-Talhi, a Libyan prime minister in the 1980s, appeared on state television on Monday reading an address to elders in Benghazi, asking them to "give a chance to national dialogue to resolve this crisis, to help stop the bloodshed, and not give a chance to foreigners to come and capture our country again".
The appeal did not detail any concessions that Gaddafi's administration would be prepared to make. The rebels said they will settle for nothing less than an end to Gaddafi's four decades in power.
The fact that Al-Talhi's appeal was broadcast on tightly-controlled state television indicated that it was officially endorsed.
Until now Gaddafi and his entourage have shown little public appetite for dialogue, describing the rebels as armed youths under the influence of drugs who have been manipulated by al-Qaeda and foreign powers.
Tripoli last week appointed an envoy to take humanitarian aid to Benghazi but it was not clear if the envoy had a mandate to negotiate with the rebels.
Strengthening military positions
Security forces loyal to Gaddafi have strengthened their military position in the last few days, squeezing rebel-held towns in the west and checking the advance of rebel militias westwards towards the capital, Tripoli.
There has also been fierce fighting in the eastern city of Misurata, located between Tripoli and Gaddafi's hometown Sirte, with reports of at least 18 people killed.
Families residing in Ras Lanuf began heading eastward in an apparent attempt to flee the fighting in that strategic port town, our correspondent there said. Several people were reported to have been killed in battles a day earlier, including a family trying to flee the fighting.
Gaddafi supporters moved eastward on Tuesday in an effort to push the rebels back and recapture fallen towns, with reports emerging that they have taken the central Libyan town of Bin Jawad.
Valerie Amos, UN under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief co-ordinator, said in a statement that the Benghazi Red Crescent reported that Misurata was also under attack by government forces again.
"Humanitarian organisations need urgent access now,'' she said. "People are injured and dying and need help immediately."
Witnesses also told Al Jazeera that Az-Zawiyah, west of Tripoli, was under heavy attack by government forces.
For now, the Gaddafi government has managed to halt the rebel advance that began last week when fighters ventured beyond the opposition-controlled eastern half of the country.
Rebels plead for help
The rebel forces say they will be outgunned if the government continues to unleash its air attacks on them and are pleading for the international community to impose a no-fly zone to prevent this.
"We don't want a foreign military intervention, but we do want a no-fly zone," rebel fighter Ali Suleiman told AP.
"We are all waiting for one,'' he said. The rebels can take on "the rockets and the tanks, but not Gaddafi's air force''.
The US president said on Monday that the US and its NATO allies were still considering a military response to the violence even as Britain and France were drafting a UN resolution that would establish a no-fly zone.
Barack Obama said the US will stand with the Libyan people as they face "unacceptable'' violence. He also sent a strong message to Gaddafi, saying he and his supporters will be held responsible for the violence there.
 |
| Read more of our Libya coverage |
William Hague, the UK foreign minister, said Britain is "working closely with partners on a contingency basis on elements of a resolution on a no-fly zone".
However, a British diplomat at the UN clarified that the draft resolution is being prepared in case it is needed but no decision has been made to introduce it at the Security Council.
The six US-allied Gulf Arab nations on Monday said they back a UN-enforced no-fly zone over Libya to protect civilians. The Gulf states also condemned the killings by pro-government forces in Libya as "massacres".
Abdul Rahman Hamad al-Attiyah, the secretary general of the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC), said "the massacres committed by the regime" in Libya against its own citizens amount to "crimes against humanity".
The protection of Libyan citizens is an "absolute priority," al-Attiyah said. He was speaking late Monday at a meeting of the oil-rich group in the UAE capital Abu Dhabi.
Hundreds if not thousands of people have died since Libya's uprising began on February 14 in an effort to end Gaddafi's more than 41-year rule, although tight restrictions on media make it near impossible to get an accurate number.
More than 200,000 people have fled the country, most of them foreign workers. The exodus is creating a humanitarian crisis across the border with Tunisia.
No comments:
Post a Comment