By Ali Ibrahim
One
of the features of the current Egyptian scene- which has witnessed the tragedy
of the bloody events in front of the Maspero building, and which has taken on a
dangerous sectarian dimension threatening the national fabric and the
relationship between the nation’s elements; the Muslims and the Christians- are
the rumors and reported statements that today declare the opposite of what is
said the next day, and in the process straying from the truth. Everyone is
skeptical of everyone, political positions change from one moment to the next,
whilst the public remains confused. No one knows what really happened or the
reasons behind it, as if there is a misleading media machine seeking to mess
with people’s minds.
Approximately
25 died in bloody clashes after Christians marched in protest against the
burning of a church or guest house in Aswan. There were several stories
reported yesterday, alongside contradictory witness testimonies. The media
presented different accounts; we do not know who started shooting, or what the
story is with the thugs who appear at every opportunity to turn a peaceful
protest into a bloody, violent one. Why was the crisis not remedied from the
start in Aswan, and resolved by law to put everyone’s minds at rest? Why were
nerves allowed to fray in this way, taking us back in time? What is the story
with the media’s policy of confusion, having attempted in some moments to
incite without any responsibility, instead of calming the situation?
An
example of this misleading media machine was the strange statement that was
posted on websites and circulated by the Egyptian media amidst the bloody
events witnessed the night before last. US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton,
in an alleged statement to CNN, was reported to have warned the ruling military
council against prejudicing minorities, and offered to send American troops to
Egypt to protect places of worship and important facilities. This news was
circulated and commented upon without any attention paid to the denial by US
officials yesterday. Furthermore, these words were not published by any
respected media outlets, or even the television network which was claimed to
have received the statement.
The
alleged words seem illogical because they suggest foreign military
intervention, which inevitably would provoke Egyptian public opinion and lead
to angry reactions. It appears that this was the intention of the websites that
carried and promoted the news, whether they knew it was incorrect or were
fooled by it. It was more fuel to the sectarian fire amidst an inflamed crisis
with considerable history, and a means of promoting the idea that there are
those who want to put Egypt under international protection. If someone thinks
for a second they would find these words to be absurd, because no one can put a
country of 85 million under international protection and bear that
responsibility.
Egypt
is experiencing a state of transition like a ship passing through storms, and
it needs much wisdom and reasoning in order to reach its mooring. It is natural
that after a revolution such as the one which occurred on the 25th of January,
demands are coming forth in every form and from every type of group that felt
it had been wronged or denied its rights. Among these groups are the
Christians, who feel there has been an injustice with regards to the laws that
govern the establishment of houses of worship. It is natural that they have
concerns when they see the rise of Islamic currents that can move freely after
January 25th, and are now talking about an Islamic state. The Christians want
the strict application of the law, and strong legislation to criminalize
sectarian incitement, ensuring against the escalation of tensions in the manner
which we saw.
The
road is difficult and it will require facts and transparency. If the task is
too daunting and confusing for the current authority, which is running affairs
faced with a torrent of demands and protests while the country is undergoing an
economic slide that threatens bankruptcy, as international indicators warn, then
there is nothing wrong with the government and the military council declaring
frankly that their mission is a transitional one, represented in the safe
transfer of power through elections, and that the major issues and demands must
wait for the forthcoming government and elected president, a condition which
would accelerate the handover of power.
-This commentary was published in Asharq al-Awsat on 11/10/2011
-Ali Ibrahim is Asharq Al-Awsat's Deputy Editor-in-Chief, based in London
-Ali Ibrahim is Asharq Al-Awsat's Deputy Editor-in-Chief, based in London
No comments:
Post a Comment