It is unacceptable, either on the organizational level of the political group or politically, in the educative programs taught by the political cadres in the Arab-national and leftist groups, also in the liberal ones, to accept the joining of cohesive political groups of an already existing political group or party. However, if the political wills and visions were in harmony, then disband of such groups and joining as single individuals is the way to join… that is what happened in the fifties and sixties when there was one political group and the Egyptian communists wanted to join it, and so their groups were disbanded and they joined as individuals.
I believe this is what happened also with muslim brotherhood in some cases, as the cadre of muslim brotherhood who left the group and was no longer loyal to it was accepted to join… there are examples of big names in such regard…
The reason that was and still is behind this rule is that if the most rigid and cohesive “crystal” was put in a liquid, it can attract the atoms around it; meaning that the one who has a stronger and more experienced organizational presence can attract the rest of elements in any process of political merging.
In those programs also, the right reality of a proper political life imposes the existence of general rules governing the political conflict… atop of those rules is that the conflict shall be peaceful using tools like ideas, discourse, open cultural, economic, and social work… and not an armed warring conflict equipped with rifles, machine-guns, bombs, pistols,… etc. reaching to bladed weapons.
Such conflict cannot remain peaceful unless the “ideological” bases of the differing parties reject violence, do not incite it and condemn carrying and using of arms… now, the key and logical question would be: what should be done in facing of an armed dogmatic extremist political group whose ideology incites violence and does not only encourages carrying arms but also affirms the necessity of having a special wing for carrying out violent armed operations against opponents?
I believe the proper right answer depends first on diagnosing the circumstances that led to the existence of such disorder in our reality and which led to its continuity and later led to having such armed group in command and control of the country and them assuming the reins of government… if we discovered that there is a huge gap, gross negligence, and great weakness of all the parties concerned in the first place of preventing such thing from happening, then we easily say there is a necessity to have an armed cohesively-organized opposing entity governed by a credo more established than of that we talk about.
In simple words, it was a must to face muslim brotherhood as an armed dogmatic extremist organized group by the Egyptian army as an armed cohesively-organized group governed by the well-established profound national credo that is in no way can go in a comparison with the ideology of muslim brotherhood.
Only the Egyptian army was the one capable of taking this action amid the political frailty witnessed by the other parties and political groups and which had no capacity to prevent the armed muslim brotherhood gangs of jumping to Egypt’s presidency and ruling after they spread in every aspect of our life right under our noses and we lacked the political ability to prevent or at least decrease their peril.
I write such words about the political groups and the “dialogue” that took place in our political life and how it is simply nothing but a matter of balance of powers because of the voices that started to increase its decades-long known ridiculous talk that began to exceed all limits of ethics of public political work and all rules of logic and bases of proper understanding of the current historical course by showering the regime and the president with false accounts, insults, and empty of any sense silly accusations.
These voices, during the last three decades, took the mission of thwarting all attempts of reform and impeding all the circumstances paving the way for reform or even revolution… if I had more space to write, I would have provided a chronologically-ordered realistic details of what those calling for reform and change thwarted… the tragically funny thing is they look like the doctor who sacrificed the lives of the mother and the baby for the operation to succeed.
Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar
This article was published in Al Ahram newspaper on October 5, 2017.
To see the original article, go to:
#alahram #ahmed_elgammal #Egypt