After
massive theft of votes from liberal and radical candidates in the first round
of Egypt’s presidential elections in May,
there was widespread fear that the country’s ruling military would rig the
results in the run-off between its favored candidate, Ahmed Shafiq, and the
Muslim Brotherhood (MB) candidate, Mohamed Morsi, a fear exacerbated by the
delay in announcing those results. To hedge its bets in case it couldn’t get
away with outright theft of the election, the Supreme Council of the Armed
Forces (SCAF) issued a series of rulings in the days before the results were
announced, dissolving parliament and stripping the incoming president of
virtually all power.
SCAF’s
measures included giving military police and soldiers the ability to arrest and
detain civilians. It also overturned legislation passed by the dismissed
parliament that had forbidden former Mubarak regime figures (like Shafiq) from
running for president.
To top it
all, just a few hours before the polls for the runoff had closed, SCAF announced
an “addendum” to the constitutional declaration of March 2011, under which it,
and not the now-dissolved parliament, would pick members of the commission to
write a new constitution. It also limited what could be in such a document,
reserving control of certain ministries to itself, and establishing its right
of veto over constitutional provisions that contravened the “interests of the
country,” as well as reserving to itself the right to declare war (obviously
intended as reassurance to Israel and the United States).
In sum,
SCAF was attempting to carry out a “soft coup,” i.e., a usurpation of a variety
of powers preserving its dictatorial role, as opposed to a “hard coup”
involving violent attacks and mass detentions. No one is under any illusion
about the potential for SCAF to switch from the former to the latter. But the
Egyptian masses showed by flocking back to the country’s squares that they
would not abide by a theft of the presidential election and would continue
mobilizing against SCAF’s new measures.
The Tuesday
after its dissolution some parliament members had threatened to convene outside
their building, from which SCAF had locked them out. In the end, few from the
formerly MB-dominated parliament turned out, which was viewed as yet another
indication of the MB leadership’s unwillingness to confront the military.
Starting on
Tuesday, June 19 (after the second round voting was done), masses of people
returned to the squares in Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, and elsewhere, answering
calls by the Brotherhood along with radical youth and leftist political
organizations to demonstrate against the military’s new moves and the threat
that Shafiq might be declared president. The squares remained filled until
Morsi was declared the winner.
Now the
question is whether the Brotherhood leadership—which at a number of points
since Mubarak’s downfall has aligned itself with SCAF against pro-democracy
protesters—will continue to support mass mobilizations to challenge the
military’s legal and constitutional maneuvers.
An early
test of the MB leadership’s fortitude came with Morsi’s swearing in. The
military had insisted it be done in front of the SCAF-appointed Supreme
Constitutional Court, but activists demanded he come to Tahrir Square and take his oath before the
masses. In the end he went first to Tahrir, and then to the Court.
The
Brotherhood—which, under its religious overlay, is a bourgeois party whose
leadership consists overwhelmingly of rich businessmen—is trapped between the
awareness of its ranks of the need to mobilize against the soft coup, and its
fear of those same ranks. The leaders, like the ranks, realize that they are in
danger of becoming a ruling party that isn’t allowed to rule—or perhaps even to
exist. Yet the leadership fears far more a coming together of its mostly
working-class and peasant base with the revolutionaries in the squares and
workplaces who want to pursue to the end this revolution, whose main slogan
remains “Bread, Freedom, and Social Justice.”
The MB
leadership is particularly scared because it had been able to keep its ranks
from joining mobilizations called by radical groups since the revolution, even
when those groups were being violently attacked by the military, and it was
able on occasion to turn some of its members toward slander and violence
against them. But in June the squares of Egypt once again became a place where the
rank and file of the MB and various Islamist groups stood shoulder to shoulder
with secular radical elements in opposing military rule and in dialogue with
each other about how best to do so. Clearly, this unified, quick, and massive
mobilization convinced SCAF not to steal outright the election but rather to
rely on the new laws and appointments that it had just made to maintain the
vast bulk of real power.
The demands
in the statement by a broad alliance of radical groups calling for the Tahrir
mobilization gives a good sense of the dangers posed by the soft coup, and the
steps needed to roll it back. The groups demanded a mass mobilization against
the military’s constitutional and legal usurpations; a declaration by the
president-elect rejecting the same; parties, political movements and trade
unions to elect a Constituent Assembly on the basis of consensus in order to
block the military’s attempts to intervene in the formation of the assembly;
and that the president-elect must issue an immediate order calling on the
military to return to its barracks and canceling the powers granted to the
military police to arrest civilians.
The groups
also demanded that the president-elect issue an immediate amnesty for all
civilians detained by the military and form a committee to investigate the
crimes committed against the revolutionaries and to punish the killers of the
martyrs. They called for the president-elect to cancel the exceptional measures
that restrict the exercise of democratic rights, and especially the
criminalization of strikes.
A related
statement was issued by the Revolutionary Socialists. They warned the MB youth
in particular to continue their mobilization and to keep a watchful eye on
their party’s leaders, and called for masses to stay in the squares until their
demands were met.
In addition
to echoing the demands of the alliance (of which it is a part) against the
“soft coup” measures, the RS demanded the immediate surrender of power by the
army; a popular referendum on the dissolution of parliament; the complete
purging of all state institutions that have been militarized in recent months;
stabilization of prices, an end to privatization, nationalization of the
monopolies and the return of the companies for which sales to private owners
have been overturned by the courts.
The RS also
pointed again to the need to unite the squares and the workplaces, to link the
economic and the political. And in fact the return to the squares in June was
matched by an uptick in action at workplaces—and even a combination of the two.
On July 6,
six health-care workers’ unions united in calling for a general strike over the
state budget just passed by SCAF. The unions called on Morsi to fulfill his
promises of increasing the health budget. A leader of the doctors’ union, Abdel
Rahman Gamal, told Al Masry Al Youm that the unions denounced SCAF for seizing
legislative authority and passing the state budget, saying the new budget was
no different than the last one of Mubarak.
The same
paper (available on the web in English as Egypt Independent) reported that on
July 3, hundreds of workers at the Alexandria branch of Pirelli, the huge
Italian tire manufacturer, had joined environmental monitoring unit workers in
front of the presidential palace to meet Morsi to raise their demands over wage
and job security issues.
And the
same week a group of Metro workers began a sit-in at a Metro stop and
threatened to begin a hunger strike if their demands were not met. They
demanded that Morsi implement permanent contracts promised by SCAF-appointed
Prime Minister Kamal al-Ganzouri but never delivered.
This
workplace-based militancy is being matched by Cairo slum residents who are resisting
eviction by rich real estate developers.
An early
indication that the MB hopes to be able to ignore such working-class-based
action is seen in the report by revolutionary blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy that
top MB officials were claiming that workers protesting in front of the
presidential palace were part of some “counterrevolutionary plot,” and had
called them “mercenaries” paid to protest by State Security Police and
businessmen affiliated with the dissolved National Democratic Party.
For news
of what U.S. activists are doing in solidarity with
the Egyptian revolution, see the website of the Coalition to Defend the
Egyptian Revolution: defendegyptianrevolution.org.
> The
article above was written by Andrew Pollack, and is reprinted from the July
2012 print edition of Socialist Action newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment