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
No comments:
Post a Comment