Unhappy customers

From Sharm El-Sheikh to Ethiopia, the common view is that we are getting a raw deal, writes Fatemah Farag

---

In the wake of Sharm El-Sheikh, the press was chock-full of analyses. Commenting on the plethora of opinions being voiced as to who -- the Arabs or the Israelis -- came out on top, Ibrahim Nafie in Al-Ahram on 10 February said the meetings should be considered "a starting point for a new phase of long, hard work towards ending a complex conflict which goes beyond the Palestinian issue to include the Syrian and Lebanese tracks."

In the same issue of Al-Ahram, Mursi Attala highlighted the American role in taking the Sharm El-Sheikh initiative forward. "As soon as Washington undertakes the necessary revision of its policies in the Middle East [basing this policy] on balanced and fair criteria, this will result automatically in balancing the regional equation in a manner conducive to the achievement of peace in the area." Attala suggested that the time has come for the US to get Israel to take confidence-building measures such as the withdrawal to pre-28 September 2000 borders.

Opinions were voiced in the press this week to the effect that the US may be inclined to finally make the policy shift everyone has spent years asking for. In Al-Akhbar on 12 February former minister of foreign affairs Ahmed Maher explained that the format Egyptian diplomacy succeeded in implementing at Sharm (that the core of the issue is not a security one -- the Israeli position -- and that the goal of the four-way dialogue is to resume political negotiations towards a two-state solution and comprehensive peace in the Middle East) forced Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to accept new rules of engagement.

"And we know that this format [called for by President Hosni Mubarak] is one that the United States until recently was not willing to respond to with the necessary strength and conviction because of its bias towards Israel. But it seems that [the US] may now be close to realising the danger of this bias and may be willing, as reflected in some of the statements made recently by the secretary of state, to understand the reality of the situation, the nature of the obstacles that exist and act accordingly."

However, Hussein Abdel-Razeq, writing for Al-Wafd on 11 February, would have none of this. Not only did he document the long list of ongoing Israeli acts of violence and occupation, he went on to conclude that "without a doubt [Ariel] Sharon is the big winner at Sharm El-Sheikh. The summit broke him out of his isolation, especially in relation to Egypt. This is a priceless success for the Israelis who have filled the world with their complaints against the Egyptian veto prohibiting Sharon from visiting any Egyptian cities." Sharm El- Sheikh, argues Abdel-Razeq, "succeeded in strengthening Sharon's position within Israel, regionally and internationally".

Fahmi Howeidi in Al-Ahram on 15 February suggested that all the optimism regarding the outcome of Sharm El-Sheikh should be held in check. "It is noteworthy that the word 'occupation' was only mentioned once (in Abu Mazen's speech) in spite of the fact that the occupier was sitting right there in front of him," noted Howeidi as he highlighted that the outcome of the meetings had not addressed the core problems related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. "I do not mean to say that we should go back on what was announced in Sharm El-Sheikh and return to point zero. What is required is that we be a bit cautious and reduce unwarranted optimism being spouted by the media."

But after all was said and done, everyone turned their heads in the direction of the home front. Al-Ahali 's banner on 9 February took issue with US intervention and reform. "The opposition calls for political reform to confront foreign intervention."

In this issue of the paper, Nabil Zaki argued, "what the National Democratic Party (NDP) has not yet realised is that political reform, cooperation with the opposition and developing governance is the only effective way to prevent foreign powers [from manipulating the situation to their benefit]." The nation is being subjected to no less than American blackmail as far as Zaki is concerned, making reform an issue of national security.

For his part, Mustafa El-Feki seemed tired of the fact that the term "reform" was now being used by everyone, and very loosely. In Al- Ahram on 15 February, El-Feki said, "the most dangerous thing that can happen to reform is that it be transformed into an elastic slogan -- such as is happening now -- to the point that it loses all meaning."

Gouda Abdel-Khaleq in Al-Ahali of 9 February said the average citizen cannot see any reflection of his/her problems in the new government's programme of action announced two weeks ago. Among the questions asked by such citizens, Abdel-Khaleq lists the following: What has happened to the Egyptian pound which has been devalued to the point of worthlessness? What of the bread crisis? And where is this country heading with all this corruption?

Nafie in his column in Al-Ahram on 12 February lauded the government's plan and acknowledged improvement but added, "this improvement must be felt by the citizen, especially in light of increasing prices."

But Abdel-Qader Sheheib in Al-Musawwar magazine on 11 February appeared fed up with the possibility of government accountability and solutions to what have become endemic daily problems. "Everyday some officials surprise us not only with what astonishes us but what shocks and upsets us as well, proving that we are not serious in solving our problems and that we are only good at padding over our problems." Sheheib commented on the latest plans announced by the Ministry of Housing to "solve" traffic problems within the city. "We will overlook the fact that the Ministry of Housing has overtaken the mandate of the Ministry of Transport at the same time that it fails to provide water services to Nasr City," says Sheheib who was unable to overlook the fact that "[Minister Ibrahim] Suleiman ignored a grave mistake in the building of the 26th of July Corridor [a mistake the minister now acknowledges and for which a new extension of 6th of October fly-over is being built]. This same minister is now fighting with fervour for the building of a new highway over the River Nile in spite of the opposition of specialists."

We leave Sheheib to meet up with the angst of Mohamed Omar in Al-Akhbar on 12 February as he recounts events involving a recent shipment of Ethiopian meat. "In a ministerial meeting, Hassan Khedr, the Egyptian minister of supply, took his Ethiopian counterpart aside and whispered into his ear: 'the consignment of Ethiopian sheep has arrived and I do not know what do to with it.' To which his counterpart suggested that the best thing is to 'shave their hair and sell them as police dogs!'" Omar says this dialogue is not a figment of his imagination and that Khedr was angered by the response and stormed off.

The public was disappointed when the government-promised Ethiopian meat arrived in the form of emaciated cattle and sheep. According to Gamal Badawi in Al-Wafd on 10 February, "it was a happiness not destined to be because it turned out that the company chosen to export the meat to us was nothing but a sham." Badawi says that a lot of trouble could be saved if the government would just make the effort to develop meat stocks at home.

w