I am neither a supporter of Mohamed Morsi nor of the Egyptian military. To place oneself in either camp is to assert an allegiance to hierarchy, patriarchy, capitalism, secrecy and violence. The military and the Brotherhood are not two poles that encompass Egyptian society, they are two elitist organizations with vast domestic networks, international connections, opaque business interests and legions of foot soldiers. And yet, in the international press, readers are being repeatedly presented with this false binary. 

A vast swath of the Egyptian populace has recently succumbed to national amnesia, cheering the APCs that crushed protestors at Maspero just 20 months ago. Others are being inflamed with the language of legitimacy and martyrdom pouring from the Brotherhood’s stages. State media has never been more sectarian or the independents more keen to please the ascendant military. And previously reliable foreign news outlets seem also to have lost perspective.

British newspaper The Guardian, for example, proudly boasted of its role as a reliable news source during the initial 18 days of the revolution, and truly did excellent work. But since the election of the Muslim Brotherhood it has taken a perplexing editorial line that regularly mixes veneration for our Brotherhood ex-rulers with hectoring lectures on the necessary difficulties of democracy and the ultimate sanctity of the ballot box.

The people are the great unknown. The people have spent two and a half years talking about little else other than politics. So is it too much to ask for commentators, writing in English, to stop telling us “how democracy works?"

I was surprised to see space given in yesterday’s Comment is Free section to Yahia Hamed, Morsi’s minister for investment, who wrote that Morsi had a “single mission: To establish stable sustainable mechanisms for the peaceful democratic exchange of power.” The article repeatedly speaks of Morsi’s fanatic devotion to democracy, but fails to give a single concrete example of any action that Morsi took in the pursuit of his supposed democratic faith. Not one.

That’s because there were none. Now that the Muslim Brotherhood have been ousted from power they repeat the words "democracy" and "legitimacy" incessantly — but this abuse of history and of language must be challenged. Morsi’s legitimacy was lost the moment Brotherhood militias were unleashed on a protest sit-in last November, the moment the activist Mohamed al-Guindy gasped for his last breath in a police torture cell, and the moment four Shias were lynched without a word of criticism from the government. Democracy under the Brotherhood was no different than under Mubarak or under SCAF — by opposing them, by thinking differently to them, you risked your life.

And if we want to consider Morsi’s commitment to the democratic process, let’s remember how a post-revolutionary constitution was forced on a population with the approval of just 64 percent of a 33 percent turnout.

In an editorial on July 9, the Guardian wrote, “According to our body count, more Egyptians have been killed and injured in two weeks of protests than in one year under Mohamed Morsi.” What the editorial doesn’t say is that in this period at least nine people were killed by a gunman inside the Brotherhood’s headquarters, eight were killed by Brotherhood protesters and there is a wave of sectarian violence sweeping the countryside — the worst episode so far, seeing at least four Christians killed in Luxor. The body count is higher and it is rising, not only because the military are back on the streets, but because the Brotherhood is armed and angry and will not back down.

The Armed Forces and the Brotherhood both have blood on their hands, and both seem determined to escalate. And let there be no doubt — we recognize that the ultimate and gravest threat to the revolution is the military, that the most brutal and well-equipped organization is the military, that the institution that is most to blame for the country’s vast problems is the military. But that does not mean that liberal news outlets in the West should canonize the Brotherhood because they’re in the habit of defending persecuted Muslims at home. Neither the military nor the Brotherhood have any interest in delivering the people’s demands of “bread, freedom and social justice.” We know this. What we don’t know is what the people can do next. 

The people are the great unknown. The people have spent two and a half years talking about little else other than politics. So is it too much to ask for commentators, writing in English, to stop telling us “how democracy works?" Because, from where we’re standing, the fire sale of Greece, the bailouts of the banks, the titanic advertising budgets of electoral candidates, the Tory Old Boy’s Club government and the invisible muscle of the lobbies are just a few hints that no one’s democracy is working properly.

And if the ultimate arbiter of legitimacy is the ballot box, perhaps US citizens could be allowed vote on whether to continue military aid to Egypt? Or UK citizens could choose where David Cameron next flies to peddle his weapons? There is not a fair and functional system anywhere in the world. At least Egypt’s is in flux and her governments are trembling. And as long as the people believe they don’t have to accept their reality, as long as they believe that their future has not been decided for them, then something new is possible.

This piece was originally submitted to The Guardian out of politeness and respect, but was rejected.

Comments

Brilliantly put ya Omar. I

Brilliantly put ya Omar. I second what you have said.

Very well said ya Omar. As

Very well said ya Omar. As you say and as people such as Samir Amin to mention one name have been saying, we are currently in a situation of a global retreat when it comes to democracy. Well done for challenging the cosy Guardian consensus. These people are actually very dangerous given the vast number of people in the West that read and passively absorb 'the Guardian version' of events.. They also continue to give Tony Bliar plenty of column inches - Stunning amnesia at work here too...

also- even if democracy works

also- even if democracy works as it does, there are well enshrined critieria for impeachment in western democracy, based on "abuses of power" ... so early resignation is not some sort of oriental hoax.

Wow. Celebrating the "people"

Wow. Celebrating the "people" and demonizing the Western media never gets old. Did you consider the fact that this entire dichotomy between MB and the Military emerged from the people themselves? Or that "the people" are the same people who join the MB and wield weapons in the military? Why not just choose any old truism as your deus ex machina to the problem - blind sectarianism - that you so correctly diagnosed? Like time: "Time is the great unknown". That sound pretty good too, and, like "the people", is a variable whose effects cannot be falsified due to its vagueness.

But overall, nice article.

Maybe I'm wrong, but do not

Maybe I'm wrong, but do not think for two years, "people" have mostly talked about politics, I think mainly about to work and have something to live. A - persistent - turmoil does not allow to meet these needs. It applies in all countries, as well as in any countries intellectuals eletists do as the general population shares their views.

Maybe I'm wrong, but do not

Maybe I'm wrong, but do not think for two years, "people" have mostly talked about politics, I think mainly about to work and have something to live. A - persistent - turmoil does not allow to meet these needs. It applies in all countries, as well as in any countries intellectuals eletists do as the general population shares their views.

Great pice Omar... Agree

Great piece Omar... Agree wholeheartedly... Keep it up...

Omar - I'm so pleased someone

Omar - I'm so pleased someone has written this. And you have done so beautifully. As a Brit who lived in Egypt in 2010 to 2012 (and wish I still did) I am pretty horrified by everything I am reading in the paper I have trusted and read for years. I think much of it has to do with the fact that Jack Shenker is no longer Egypt correspondent and the paper now seems to be content now to allow non-speakers of Arabic with little or no knowledge of Egypt to be the transmitters of knowledge on Egypt to the British population. I didn't read yesterday's Comment Is Free piece but I did read this editorial, which I don't know if you caught, but if you didn't give it a read...http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/29/egypt-revolution-obs... The smug, self satisfied tone of this downright ignorant piece seemed to me to imply that, just as you say, the Brits somehow know much better about democracy than any Egyptian could. This condescendingly didactic tone seems to be present in all the British coverage of Egypt at the moment in a way it wasn't during the Revolution in 2011. I'm not sure what's happened - maybe all the sudden union jack waving I saw when I went home for a few days last week has rubbed off on even the Guardian journalists. Pretty ironic when, as you say, we are not really in a position to feel superior in our implementation of democracy at the moment.

Thank you for sharing. I've

Thank you for sharing. I've been trying to find some proper inside news from the people. I'm sorry for your struggle and for the hopelessness of media around the world. But know there are people whose hearts are with you. Sending solidarity from Australia xx

This is pathetic. To blame

This is pathetic. To blame only the Brotherhood for violence is not to look inward: as if the liberals and secularists in the opposition are not doing their part. The propensity to violence is an integral part of the "people" as all revolutions have taught us. Egypt is no different. For NSF leaders to have welcomed the military take over is a naive at best and a dangerous at worst strategy that is going to backfire. But politics can go nowhere if the secular left does not leave its high moral ground to do some hard nosed self-critique.

Excellent article. The

Excellent article. The Guardian rejected it? What a shame. However, in German media you can find a similar bias. There is an avalanche of comments defending the legitimacy of Morsi because of the MB or FJP success at ballot boxes. Most of these comments are written by people who have no idea of Egypt and the Egyptian people whatsoever. Others are written by people who live in Egypt but who just dont cover the Muslim Brotherhood's systematic lies or their human rights violations at all. The selective perception and reporting done by some journalists is just stunning.

To say that Morsi showed no

To say that Morsi showed no 'signs of democracy' is baseless and false. (Go through the articles i have linked) And very much the type of selective memory you seem to detest. And he did criticize the attacks on the shias. Just do a google search for the story. No one seems to remember now, but the opposition was inflexible and obstructionist, as even their supporters acknowledged. http://latitude.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/morsis-law/,

Add new comment