 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 25 Nov. - 1 Dec. 1999 Issue No. 457 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 25 Nov. - 1 Dec. 1999 Issue No. 457
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Features Profile Travel Living Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Brotherhood in decline?
Omayma Abdel-LatifA familiar scenario was reenacted when 20 members of the illegal Muslim Brotherhood were arrested earlier this month on charges of disseminating the ideology of a banned group.
While some political analysts saw the arrests as yet another round in the confrontation between the state and the group, others expressed fear that such a step might result in political stagnation because it served as a reminder of the scope of the conflict between the state and the Brotherhood and also ruled out any possibility of granting the Islamist trend a legitimate political representation.
The arrests could not have come at a more difficult time in the group's history as it struggles to come to terms with developments on the political scene, with professional syndicate and general elections approaching. There is also the phenomenon of new political groupings with an Islamist platform which seek legality in the form of state-sanctioned political parties, a development which could possibly lead to a fragmentation of the Islamist trend.
Fresh calls were made by political protagonists this week, urging the Brotherhood to break the cycle of confrontation with the state by giving up some of their ideological pretensions and undergoing a process of pragmatic adjustment with the political order.
But are the Brothers willing to undertake the tough task of revising the theoretical and ideological tenets that were first outlined some 70 years ago? The answer is a simple "no," according to the group's Supreme Guide Mustafa Mashhour. "We abide by laws and respect all the political rights granted by the constitution. We don't want a confrontation with the state because we seek what is best for the national interest of this country," Mashhour told Al Ahram Weekly.
His statement clearly suggests that the Brotherhood has no intention of making any radical changes of its doctrine. Do they believe that a new vision is needed as the century comes to a close? Another "no." Mashhour does not believe that the group should follow the example of the Brothers in Jordan and Yemen who keep religious and political activities separate. He rejected the idea that the group should be divided into two entities: a religious body which undertakes religious tasks and a political civilian party that runs for elections. "There can be no separation between the temporal and the sacred. Religion is the Qur'an, the money, the science, and the body politics. It is an all-encompassing affair," said Mashhour.
While Mashhour, in his interview with the Weekly, emphasised that his group respects the freedom of all political activities and the rights of all political groupings, yet one of the major criticisms levelled at the Brothers is that their alleged commitment to political pluralism extends only as far as it will help them win elections. In fact, one view of the Brothers which has wide currency among other political parties is their "manipulative" attitude which, as some argue, proves the wisdom of the government's determination to keep the Islamists out of the political process, if only for the time being.
"They maintained a policy of distancing themselves from other political forces," said Wahid Abdel-Maguid, editor of the Arab Strategic Report , published by the Al-Ahram Centre for Strategic and Political studies. This aloofness in dealing with other political protagonists, according to Abdel-Maguid, is due to "a sense of exaggerated power" which banished them to the sidelines of the political order. "One of their grave historical mistakes is their inability to integrate with the political order. As a result, it was easy for the government to hit them where it hurts without undermining the political order," Abdel-Maguid said.
Accordingly, the low-key reaction of political parties to the arrests should have come as no surprise. It was only the leftist Tagammu party which issued a statement condemning the trial of civilians before military courts, a statement which Salah Eissa, a prominent leftist writer, believes to be the work of a "moderate" faction within the party's ranks. Eissa blames the Brotherhood for the current disruption of alliances between political parties. He thinks that no political party can now afford a confrontation with the state. "The weak response to the Brotherhood arrests is mainly because all the political forces have their minds set on the forthcoming elections and they are better off striking deals with the government, which will guarantee them more seats in parliament. Any blow against the Brothers, which they perceive as a strong contender in elections, is in their favour," said Eissa.
Along the same line of reasoning, there is the view that the Brothers' presence in the political order would pose a major obstacle in the way of the promotion of democracy.
"The phobia of terrorism and the fear of establishing an Islamic state in Egypt have given the state a formidable excuse to limit the chances of greater democracy and freedom. All the political protagonists were united in their call for struggling against authoritarianism, but the Islamist trend has played a role in the fragmentation of this position," Eissa said.
Despite the negative impact of the arrests on the Brothers' organisational strength, yet Eissa and others saw a positive side to this development. "It will force the Brothers to re-consider their alliances and accept the idea of aligning themselves with others which they have turned down for long," Bahaaeddin Hassan, director of the Cairo Centre for Human Rights Studies, said.
Are the Brothers willing to make a fundamental shift in their ideology in return for legality?
"In 1946, the Brothers were offered three ministerial posts in the cabinet in return for changing the name of the group. They turned down the offer," Mashhour said. "It is not about authority. And the group has condemned violence in all its forms. We haven't committed any acts of violence for which we should be repentant. What is being said in this respect is a fabrication."
Many observers believe that a fundamental shift in the thinking of the Brothers is inevitable if they are to be integrated in the domestic political order. "All the political parties should have a new vision in order to come out of this political stagnation as the century draws to a close. But the Brothers, more than any one else, should be more pragmatic when dealing with the political realities of Egypt and when dealing with the state," Eissa said.
No breakthrough appears likely unless the group changes its doctrine. Otherwise, both Abdel-Maguid and Eissa agree, the result will be a fragmentation of the Islamist trend and probably "the beginning of the end for the Brothers."
But the Brothers' belief that they are right is almost an article of faith. Mashhour insists that while the basic tenets of the group's ideology will remain unchanged, change could be pursued in terms of the means of implementing this ideology. However this change, in Mashhour's words, should be "within the framework of what God ordered."
