[News] The Making of Egypt's Revolution

[Anti-Imperialist News]

http://www.counterpunch.org/
February 1, 2011


People Power in Action

The Making of Egypt's Revolution

By ESAM AL-AMIN

Freedom lies behind a door, closed shut
It can only be knocked down with a bleeding fist

-- Egyptian Poet-Laureate Ahmad Shawqi (1869-1932)

On April 21, 2008, an assistant high school 
principal placed an advertisement in Al-Ahram, 
the largest daily newspaper in Egypt, pleading 
disparately with President Hosni Mubarak and his 
wife to intervene and release her daughter from prison.

It turned out that her 27 year-old daughter, 
Israa’ Abd el-Fattah, was arrested 10 days 
earlier because of her role in placing a page on 
Facebook encouraging Egyptians to support a 
strike in the industrial city of al-Mahalla that had taken place on April 6.

In her spare time, she and two of her colleagues 
created the Facebook page. Within days of posting 
it, over 70,000 people supported their call. 
After the security forces cracked down against 
the huge riots in al-Mahalla on April 6, Abd el-Fattah was arrested.

What was odd about this arrest was that although 
thousands of people have been arrested over the 
past three decades, it was the first time that a 
warrant was issued against a female under the 
notorious emergency laws imposed in the country 
since 1981. To get out of prison she had to 
apologize and express regret for her actions. But 
the experience made her more determined than ever to be politically active.

On that day, the “April 6 Youth” movement was 
created. For the next two and a half years it 
maintained its presence and created one of the 
most popular political forums on several social 
networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.

When the  president of Tunisia, Zein al-Abideen 
Ben Ali, was deposed on January 14, following a 
four week popular uprising, the April 6 movement, 
like millions of youth across the Arab World, was 
inspired, energized, and called for action.

Changing of the Guard: the Youth leads

Looking at the calendar, Israa’ and her 
colleagues picked the next Egyptian holiday, 
which was ironically “Police Day” falling on 
Tuesday, January 25. Within a few days they 
called on all social media sites for massive 
protests and an uprising against the Mubarak regime.

They called for marches to start from all major 
squares, mosques and churches in Cairo and 
Alexandria while asking others to help plan in 
other Egyptian cities. They insisted that the 
protests would be peaceful and that no one should bring weapons of any type.

They had four demands: that the government 
develops programs to address poverty and 
unemployment; that it would end the state of 
emergency and uphold judicial independence; the 
resignation of the interior minister whose 
ministry was notorious for torture and abuse of 
human rights; and for political reforms including 
the limitation of presidential terms to two, the 
dissolution of the parliament, and for new 
elections to be held after the massive elections fraud of last November.

Within a few days, over ninety thousand youth 
signed up and charted a comprehensive protest 
throughout Egypt. Initially, neither the 
government nor the opposition took them 
seriously. Even former IAEA director Dr. Mohammad 
Elbaradei, who has been criticizing the regime 
for over a year, was abroad due to his frequent speaking engagements.

In a show of force, the government assembled over 
two hundred thousand of its security forces 
surrounding the protesters throughout the 
country. On the other hand, hundreds of thousands 
of protesters marched representing broad cross 
sections of society, men and women, young and 
old, educated and illiterate, and declared that 
their demonstrations were peaceful but that they 
were determined to press their demands.

When they could not control the crowds the police 
beat back the protesters using water canons, tear 
gas and rubber bullets. By the end of the day 
there were over a dozen casualties and hundreds 
of injuries. This not only outraged the 
demonstrators, but also ignited the whole country.

Most of the protesters refused to go home and 
escalated the confrontation declaring an open 
demonstration in Liberation Square in downtown 
Cairo and throughout the country. The government 
continued its crackdown calling for curfews in 
Cairo, Alexandria, and Suez from 6 PM to 6 AM.

The curfews for the following days kept getting 
longer until the government called for a general 
curfew from 3 PM to 8 AM.  But each time the 
people simply ignored it and increased their 
demands, calling for total regime change and the ouster of Mubarak.

An Uprising turns into a Revolution

By Thursday, the organizers called for “A Day of 
Rage” after Friday’s congregational prayers. The 
next round of protests included participation by 
all opposition groups, the largest of which was 
the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Immediately hundreds 
of their leaders were rounded up and detained. As 
millions of people across Egypt took to the 
street, all 350,000 security forces and police 
were mobilized, advancing on the protesters and 
turning Egyptian streets and neighborhoods into 
battlegrounds. By the end of the day dozens more 
were killed and thousands injured.

Afterwards, security forces evacuated from all 
the cities. Chaos and confusion ensued. Police 
stations and buildings belonging to the ruling 
party were torched. The secret police opened all 
police stations and prisons releasing all 
criminals in a scorched-earth attempt to spread 
fear and chaos. The regime hoped to regain the 
upper hand by proving its worth to the people as their source of security.

After a four-day absence, at midnight on Friday, 
the 82-year old Egyptian president addressed his 
nation of 85 million by blaming his government, 
describing it as “inept,” and promising to 
appoint a new cabinet. By the following day he 
appointed two generals, his chief of 
intelligence, Gen. Omar Suleiman as his first 
ever vice president and Gen. Ahmad Shafiq as prime minister.

People immediately dismissed the superficial 
gestures and demanded an end to Mubarak’s 30-year 
rule. By Monday the new cabinet was sworn in, 
retaining 18 of the previous ministers, including 
those occupying the important posts of defense, 
foreign, communications, justice, and oil.

The only major change was the sacking of the 
interior minister, appointing another general in 
his place. Not a single opposition party was 
consulted, let alone appointed. The first order 
of business of the new government was to 
reconstitute the security forces and restore order.

Although by Friday the authorities had completely 
cut mobile phone and Internet services, the genie 
was already out of the bottle. When asked by the 
French news service AFP, Abd el-Fattah, who has 
been camping with her colleagues since Tuesday in 
Liberation Square, said, after the government 
disrupted the internet, "We've already announced 
the meeting places. So we've done it, we no 
longer need means of communication."

She continued, “We want the regime to go. We've 
been asking for reforms for 30 years and the 
regime has never answered or paid attention to 
our demands.” She then added, "It won't just be 
tomorrow, but the day after and the day after 
that as well. We won't stop, we won't go home.”

Amidst the chant “the People demand the fall of 
the regime,” Abd el-Fattah talked to Al-Jazeera 
TV, which has been covering the unfolding events 
non-stop since it began four days earlier, and 
called for all opposition parties to form a 
transitional government. But by Saturday the 
regime interrupted all satellite channels 
including Al-Jazeera. Egyptians were now totally 
cut off from all means of information and communications.

By Sunday afternoon a provisional parliament, 
made up of the major opposition parties including 
the MB, the liberal Wafd, and the April 6 and 
Kefaya movements, met at Liberation Square and 
appointed a 10-member committee, headed by Dr. 
Elbaradei. Their mandate was to negotiate with 
the regime the departure of the embattled 
president. The April 6 youth was disappointed 
since they had hoped for a formation of a 
transitional government rather than a committee 
that would initiate negotiations with the despised regime.

Meanwhile, in the absence of the police and 
security forces, the president sent the army to 
restore order and intimidate the protesters. 
Tanks and armed vehicles were occupying major 
squares, thoroughfares, and public buildings. The 
following day F-16s and military helicopters were 
roaming the skies in a show of force. But the 
protesters immediately embraced the army, hugging 
them, chanting for them, and asking them to be on their side.

The head of the army declared that the military 
would not attack or intimidate the people but 
would only protect the country and maintain 
order. A few officers even joined the 
demonstrators in denouncing the regime. Overall, 
however, the army seems to have kept its loyalty 
to the regime despite the popular call to oust the president.

Meanwhile, people formed popular committees to 
protect their properties and neighborhoods. 
Hundreds of looters caught by the people were 
found to be either deserted police officers or 
common criminals released by the police. All were 
turned to the army for detention.

Despite the massive demonstrations, the total 
paralysis of the country, and the increasingly 
hardened will of the Egyptian people, President 
Mubarak remained arrogant, stubborn, and unmoved 
by his people’s rage towards his regime. He also 
was emboldened as he received support from other 
authoritarians such as the King of Saudi Arabia, 
and the leaders of Libya and the Palestinian Authority.

Furthermore, a former Israeli defense minister 
Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, considered one of the 
closest Israeli politicians to Mubarak, told the 
Jerusalem Post after speaking to Mubarak, “I have 
no doubt that the situation in Egypt is under 
control.” He then added, “Our relations with Egypt are strategic and intimate.”

As the events unfolded the regime seemed 
confounded and shaken. Initially, the official 
news agencies in Egypt blamed some members of the 
ruling party and low-ranking officials. For 
instance the party demanded and received the 
resignation of Ahmad Ezz, the right-hand man of 
Jamal Mubarak, the president’s son and undeclared heir apparent.

Ezz was a corrupt billionaire businessman who 
quickly rose through the party ranks and oversaw 
the latest fraudulent parliamentary elections 
where the party won 97 per cent of the seats. 
Just a few weeks ago, he was praised by ruling 
party officials for orchestrating the 
overwhelming victory despite more than 1500 
judicial orders that overturned much of the 
election results, but were ignored by the 
government. Ezz and his family immediately left 
the country in his private jet.

Likewise, both of Mubarak’s sons and their 
families left to London in their private jets. 
The head of the Cairo International Airport also 
announced that 19 private jets owned by the 
richest families in the country left to Dubai on 
Saturday. One of these corrupt billionaires was 
Hussein Salem, a former intelligence officer and 
a close confidant of the president. Dubai airport 
officials declared that they seized over $300 million in cash from him.

Salem was the head of a private energy company 
that teamed up with an Israeli conglomerate to 
secure a long-term contract to sell natural gas 
to Israel. In June 2008 Les Afriques reported 
that Egypt was subsidizing Israel with hundreds 
of millions of dollars every year in energy 
purchase. By January 2010, the Israeli newspaper 
Haaretz exposed the secret and reported that 
Israel was in fact receiving natural gas from 
Egypt at a 70 per cent discount. The scandal was 
swept aside by the former Egyptian prime minister 
who refused to divulge to the parliament the 
terms of the contract. Subsequently when the 
government was sued, a judge ruled against it and 
invalidated the contract, which the government totally ignored.

Looking the other way: Human Rights but not for all

The Mubarak regime had one of the worst human 
rights records in the world. In June 2010, Human 
Rights Watch reported that “the Egyptian 
Government continued to suppress political 
dissent 
 dispersing demonstrations; harassing 
rights activists; and detaining journalists, 
bloggers, and Muslim Brotherhood members.”

Even the U.S. State Department 2008 Human Rights 
Report to Congress stated that “The (Egyptian) 
government's respect for human rights remained 
poor, and serious abuses continued in many 
areas.” It continued, “The government limited 
citizens' right to change their government and 
continued a state of emergency that has been in 
place almost continuously since 1967. Security 
forces used unwarranted lethal force and tortured 
and abused prisoners and detainees, in most cases with impunity.”

It concluded, “Security forces arbitrarily 
arrested and detained individuals, in some cases 
for political purposes, and kept them in 
prolonged pretrial detention. The executive 
branch placed limits on and pressured the 
judiciary. The government's respect for freedoms 
of press, association, and religion declined 
during the year, and the government continued to 
restrict other civil liberties, particularly 
freedom of speech, including Internet freedom, 
and freedom of assembly, including restrictions 
on nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). 
Government corruption and lack of transparency persisted.”

But despite this massive indictment of the 
Egyptian regime by the U.S. government, the U.S. 
continued to support the Mubarak regime, 
providing it with almost $2 billion annually, the 
second largest foreign aid recipient after 
Israel. According to the Congressional Research 
Report submitted to Congress in September 2009, 
the U.S. had subsidized the Egyptian regime with 
over $64 billion since it signed the peace treaty 
with Israel in 1979, including $40 billion in 
military hardware and security gear.

It also rewarded the regime with $7 billion debt 
relief in April 1991 for its support of the Gulf 
war earlier that year. Furthermore, it intervened 
with the Paris club to forgive half of Egypt’s 
$20 billion debt to Western governments. In 
short, the U.S. and other Western governments 
favored establishing a strategic relationship 
with Mubarak, because of the peace treaty with 
Israel, overlooking the nature of the regime’s corruption and repression.

After 9/11, the Mubarak regime played a major 
role in aiding and abetting the U.S. 
counterterrorism policy on rendition and torture. 
In 2005, the BBC reported that both the United 
States and the United Kingdom sent terrorist 
suspects to Egypt for detention. In that report, 
Egypt's prime minister acknowledged that since 
2001, the U.S. had transferred some 60-70 
detainees to Egypt as part of the "war on 
terror.” According to journalist Jane Mayer’s 
investigative book “The Dark Side,” the new Vice 
President, Suleiman, was the coordinator of the 
CIA’s extraordinary rendition program during the 
Bush era. [See Stephen Soldz’s 
<http://www.counterpunch.org/soldz01312011.html>account 
of Suleiman’s role on CounterPunch, January 31.]

Despite George Bush’s grandiose rhetoric on 
democracy and freedom, Bush welcomed Mubarak, 
calling him a “good friend” and explaining that 
he looked forward to “his wise counsel,” when the 
Egyptian president visited Bush in his Crawford 
ranch in April 2004. With Mubarak standing next 
to him Bush said, “Our nations have a 
relationship that is strong and warm. Egypt is a 
strategic partner of the United States.” He then 
thanked Mubarak’s efforts on rendition and 
torture when he said, “I'm grateful for President 
Mubarak's support in the global war against terror.”

In fact, the Bush administration subsequently 
received Jamal Mubarak at the highest levels of 
government in an attempt to groom him to succeed 
his father. In May 2006, the Washington Post 
reported that, “It was unusual for a private 
foreign citizen with no official portfolio to 
receive so much high-level attention.” The 
younger Mubarak met with Vice President Dick 
Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and 
National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, during 
his “private visit” to the U.S. While he was at 
the White House the former President stopped by to “welcome him.”

The sacred equation: Egyptian Dictatorship equals Secure Israel

The strategic relationship between Egypt and the 
U.S. was bipartisan. When President Barak Obama 
was asked by the BBC during his celebrated visit 
to Egypt in June 2009, whether he regarded 
President Mubarak as an authoritarian ruler, 
Obama answered with an emphatic “No.” Then he 
spelled out the strategic value of Mubarak when 
he said, “He has been a stalwart ally in many 
respects to the United States. He has sustained 
peace with Israel which is a very difficult thing to do in that region.”

This perceived security for Israel was key in the 
West’s continued support of the Egyptian regime. 
When Vice President Joe Biden was asked to 
comment about the turmoil in Egypt by Jim Lehrer 
of PBS, he shamelessly declared on January 27, 
that Mubarak was not a dictator.  Presenting the 
Israeli viewpoint, Biden said, “Look, Mubarak has 
been an ally of ours in a number of things and 
he's been very responsible on-- relative to 
geopolitical interests in the region: Middle East 
peace efforts, the actions Egypt has taken 
relative to normalizing the relationship with 
Israel. I would not refer to him as a dictator.”

On the same day, while Egypt’s security forces 
were killing, beating and gassing the Egyptian 
people by the thousands, Secretary of State 
Hillary Clinton offered this flimsy reaction: 
"Our assessment is that the Egyptian government 
is stable and is looking for ways to respond to 
the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."

Likewise, when White House Press Secretary Robert 
Gibbs was asked whether the White House believed 
the Egyptian government was stable, he replied 
without hesitation: “Yes.” When he was next asked 
whether the U.S. still supports Egyptian 
President Hosni Mubarak, he reiterated that Egypt remains “a strong ally.”

Not a single U.S. government official or member 
of Congress condemned the Egyptian government for 
killing and attacking its own citizens. When Neda 
Agha-Sultan was killed in Tehran in June 2009, 
many Western governments immediately issued 
world-wide condemnations blaming the Iranian 
government. But not so for the hundreds of 
Egyptians gunned down by their own government in 
broad daylight. Regretting the loss of life 
without denouncing the culprits is a disguised 
attempt to cover for the crimes and protect the perpetrators.

As the Egyptian people showed determination and 
resilience while the embattled regime intensified 
its brutality, the administration tried to 
backtrack. President Obama offered a stark 
warning to Mubarak when he said on Friday 
evening, "Suppressing ideas never succeeds in 
making them go away." Without condemning the 
regime he then urged Egyptian authorities to 
refrain from violence against their citizens," 
Obama stressed that governments "must maintain 
power through consent, not coercion," and that 
"Ultimately the future of Egypt will be 
determined by the Egyptian people.” Human rights 
advocates were encouraged and relieved by these statements.

Take a stand: Either with the people or with the regime

The following day the President convened his 
National Security Council and spoke to several 
world leaders. He gave a statement imploring 
Mubarak to open the political process and engage 
the opposition. Britain, France, Germany, and the 
European Union also called for political openness 
as well as restraint against the demonstrators.

In an interview with CNN on Sunday January 30, 
Secretary Clinton, sensing the weakness of the 
Egyptian regime, gave implicit support to the 
guarded approach in handling the popular 
revolution when she said “What we're trying to do 
is to help clear the air so that those who remain 
in power, starting with President Mubarak, with 
his new vice president, with the new prime 
minister, will begin a process of reaching out, 
of creating a dialogue that will bring in 
peaceful activists and representatives of civil 
society to, you know, plan a way forward that 
will meet the legitimate grievances of the Egyptian people.”

Yet all these mixed statements were not lost on 
the millions of protesters. In denouncing these 
ambivalent stands they chanted “No to Mubarak, No 
to Suleiman
 No to the agents of al-Amrikan (the 
Americans).” Dr. Elbaradei declared that the 
moment of truth has arrived, “The U.S. has to 
side either with the people or the regime. They 
could not be with both.” But on Monday January 
31, Press Secretary Gibbs said that the 
administration would not take sides in the 
confrontation between the regime and the people.

This hypocritical stand was in a stark contrast 
to the position Obama took two days earlier, or 
that of successive U.S. administrations with 
regard to the color revolutions in the past 20 
years as in the Ukraine and Georgia in Eastern 
Europe and Central Asia, or the demonstrations by 
the opposition groups in Iran in the aftermath of its elections in June 2009.

So what happened over the weekend for the administration’s turnabout?

The answer to this double standard seems to be 
the influence of Israel and its supporters in 
Congress, where the new Republican Speaker John 
Boehner and other Republican leaders supported 
the administration’s ambivalent policy of not abandoning the Egyptian dictator.

In Israel, a real hysteria has engulfed the 
political establishment. On January 31, Israeli 
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told a news 
conference in Jerusalem that he was concerned 
about the fate of Israel's peace treaty with 
Egypt should President Mubarak be forced out of 
power and replaced by someone more hostile toward 
Israel. He asked for support of the Egyptian 
regime lest an antagonistic regime emerges in its place.

The same day Haaretz reported that Israel called 
on the United States and a number of European 
countries over the weekend to curb their 
criticism of President Hosni Mubarak to preserve stability in the region.

It was reported on the Cairo streets that when a 
speech writer of President Mubarak rushed into 
his office and said “Mr. President; this is your 
farewell speech to the nation.” Mubarak remarked, 
“Why? Are the people leaving the country?”

This Egyptian joke captures the essence of the 
stalemate in the streets. Mubarak insists on 
staying in power regardless of any consequence, 
counting on his security apparatus, the army, and 
the implicit backing of the West. Meanwhile, the 
popular committee headed by Dr. Elbaradaei is not 
recognized by the regime, let alone to engage 
with it in meaningful negotiations.

Meanwhile, the decisive moment seems to have 
arrived. The protesters called for a million-man 
march in Liberation Square in Cairo and for a 
similar one in Alexandria on Tuesday February 1. 
Upon hearing this move, the military sent an 
important signal to the people. Gen. Ismail 
Othman, the military spokesman declared on 
national TV that the army recognizes the 
legitimate demands of the people and would not 
shoot at them. With this declaration the army 
gave an unmistakable sign for the president to 
yield. The government immediately went overdrive 
blocking all entrances to Liberation Square and 
stopped all public transportations to Cairo and 
Alexandria including trains coming from the delta and upper Egypt.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people have 
flocked to Liberation Square. Politicians and 
party leaders, Imams and priests, judges and 
lawyers, former military officers and veterans, 
labor and farmers, professionals and the 
unemployed, taxi drivers and garbage collectors, 
young and old, women and men, families with their 
children, as well as prominent actors, artists, 
poets, movie directors, journalists, and authors 
have declared their support and participation in 
this massive march. Egypt had never seen such unanimity in its modern history.

Trickery and treachery are the practices of fools

On Monday January 31, the new vice president 
Suleiman addressed the nation saying that he was 
asked by Mubarak to open a dialogue with all 
opposition groups and to ask the judiciary to 
overturn the disputed elections results of last 
November. It was a tactical retreat by the regime 
in order to waste time and exhaust the protesters.

However, the protest leaders instantly rejected 
this disingenuous offer and insisted on their 
main demand of the total removal of Mubarak and for regime change.

It seems that the embattled president would have 
to make a choice soon. He will either submit to 
the demands of the popular revolution and leave 
power or employ his exhausted security forces to 
battle his people, transforming Liberation Square to Tiananmen Square.

On the other hand, the challenge to the Egyptian 
people is whether they will stop their impressive 
revolution when the West and its local hirelings 
give up Mubarak in order to save his regime. The 
leaders of this revolution and civil society 
groups that have joined have so far insisted on 
regime change, not change of characters.

A few weeks after 9/11, the neo-cons persuaded 
Bush that after Afghanistan, the U.S. should 
pursue regime change in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria 
and its allies in Lebanon, and to give Israel a 
green light to eliminate the Palestinian 
resistance in the Occupied territories.

After almost a decade, the U.S. is struggling in 
Afghanistan and has enormously enhanced Iran’s 
strategic regional posture by handing Iraq to its 
allies. Moreover, its ally in Lebanon was toppled 
while Hezbollah’s candidate is forming the new 
government. The Palestinian Authority President 
Mahmoud Abbas and his negotiating team have 
completely lost their credibility in the eyes of 
the Palestinian people after the recent 
publications of the Palestine Papers. The West 
has lost its ally in Tunisia, and is about to 
lose another in Egypt. Meanwhile its allies in 
Algeria, Yemen and Jordan are hanging on by their fingernails.

What a reversal of fortunes!

For most of the past sixty years, the U.S. has 
perceived the Middle East, and the Muslim world 
at large, from the dual prisms of Israel and oil. 
It has provided Israel with massive military aid, 
economic assistance, political cover and 
diplomatic shelter that not only denied the 
Palestinians their legitimate rights, but also 
prolonged their suffering and misery.

Furthermore, in securing its short-term interests 
of oil and military bases, successive U.S. 
administrations have favored dictatorships and 
repressive regimes in the name of stability at 
the expense of the right of self-determination to the people of the area.

Thirty-two years ago the U.S. lost Iran and has 
ever since been in a contentious relationship 
with it for its refusal to admit its role in 
maintaining the regime of the Shah. It is 
doubtful whether the U.S. government has learned 
that lesson and whether it would be willing now 
to clearly and completely side with the people or 
respect their will to be free and independent.

In his farewell address of 1796, George 
Washington warned his countrymen and women 
against the “passionate attachment” to a foreign 
country and advised them that “against the 
insidious wiles of foreign influence . . . the 
jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly 
awake, since history and experience prove that 
foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”

Esam Al-Amin can be reached at 
<mailto:alamin1919 at gmail.com>alamin1919 at gmail.com




Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20110201/6b88ea48/attachment.htm>