Egypt's Revolutionaries Strengthen Ahmed Shafiq

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

June 3, 2012

Since January 25, 2011, I have not stopped following the course of the Egyptian revolution, and following all the Arab revolutions, because they constitute a turning point in the history of the Arab nation. The overwhelming majority of Arabs — perhaps around 85% — want change, out of their zeal for this nation and their desire to be rid of the corrupt, despotic rulers who, together with their henchmen and retinues, make up about 15%. The Egyptian revolution in particular holds a special place in people’s hearts and souls, because Egypt is the largest Arab state, whose life is life for the Arabs, and whose death would be tantamount to death for the Arabs.

Many people have not been comfortable with the course of the Egyptian revolution, for two reasons: the rivalry and mutual mudslinging among the forces of the revolution, and the disruption of public life through the frequency of protests in the public squares. These are two reasons that have turned people away from the revolution, saddened at what has become of it. People care about stability, about working for their daily bread, for their livelihood, and about seeing positive developments on the economic, political, and social fronts, and so on, but they turn away in disgust when they see manipulation, mutual mudslinging, disintegration, and strife.

Palestinians have bitter experience in this area, owing to the spread of thugs and hoodlums who threaten people’s interests in the name of revolution and the national project, and the Lebanese have had the same experience, as have the Iraqis.

…[Shaf]iq, together with Amr Moussa, received about 35% [combined] — a very high proportion. My analysis is that the weak management of the revolution, along with the divisions, mutual insults, and disruption of public life that accompanied it, pushed 20% of people to shift their positions.

What is happening now, after the Egyptian court’s ruling acquitting certain symbols of the [former] Egyptian regime of a particular charge, does not serve the interests of the revolution and the revolutionaries, but rather serves Shafiq’s interests, for two reasons: the forces of the revolution accepted the judiciary as the body to rule on a particular case — so how can positions now turn against the judiciary after the ruling has been issued? Does the revolution want a judiciary that rules according to its own wishes, or according to the law in force? If wishes are what ought to govern the judiciary, then Hosni Mubarak’s regime used to operate on precisely this principle. So why have a revolution at all, if the same practices are going to persist? The second reason is that the revolution wants to establish democracy, yet it now stands against the results of an election. The ordinary Egyptian citizen asks himself: where is the revolution’s democracy?

The forces of the revolution decided to take to the streets in protest against the judiciary, just as they protested the proportion of votes won by Ahmed Shafiq. By doing this, these forces are handing Shafiq free support. There is an emotional overreaction in the response of these forces, and they should have confined themselves to two things: appealing the ruling through proper legal channels, and showing unity behind Mohamed Morsi in the coming elections. Otherwise, the forces of the revolution harm themselves, as they are doing now, and hand their enemies a great opportunity to win the second-round elections.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “ثوار مصر يعززون أحمد شفيق” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.