The Islamic Republic of Egypt
The most important foreign event in the final days of 2012 was the ramming through of Egypt’s new, Sharia-based constitution by President Mohamed Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood allies. The cultural, demographic and geographic center of the Arab world is now set to become an Islamic Republic. Egypt’s transformation, after 60 years of secularist officers’ dabbling in modernization, will have major consequences for the Greater Middle East.
Only one-third of Egypt’s eligible voters turned out for the two-stage referendum (December 15 and 22), with 64 percent supporting the draft constitution which was swiftly signed into law by Morsi on December 26. The vote was marred by a host of irregularities, but the demands for a full inquiry have been ignored. The Brotherhood’s victory at parliamentary elections in two months’ time now seems a foregone conclusion.
THE NEW CONSTITUTION consists of an introduction, an 11-part preamble and 236 articles. The 1971 Egyptian constitution also contained a vague reference to the Sharia, but the new one goes much further. Islamic Shariah is now elevated to “the principal source of legislation,” and its principles are defined in Article 219 as “general evidence, foundational rules, rules of jurisprudence, and credible sources accepted in Sunni doctrines and by the larger community.”
The articles dealing with Sharia in the constitution “are very complicated and no one understands them but Islamic scholars,” according to Rafaat Fouda, a law professor at Cairo University. The constitution’s drafters resolved this problem in Article Four, by giving Muslim clerics at al-Azhar University the task of deciding whether Egypt’s laws are Sharia-compliant. Al-Azhar is a bastion of Islamic orthodoxy, and its senior scholars are now authorized to decide on matters of conduct, speech, lifestyle and religion. The manner in which they may act was revealed last June 20 by Grand Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb when he presented The Al-Azhar Document, an 11-point program addressing Egypt’s political future. Al-Tayeb frames democracy as “the modern formula for the Islamic precept of shura (consultation).” He accordingly supports “the people’s representatives endowed with the power of legislation in accordance with the precepts of true Islam.”
It is in this context that the deliberate vagueness of some articles of the new constitution may be more readily understood, e.g. Article 10, which empowers the government to “preserve the genuine character of the Egyptian family, its cohesion and stability and to protect its moral values, all as regulated by law.” The state shall “enable the reconciliation between the duties of a woman toward her family and her work.” Unlike its 1971 predecessor, the constitution does not specifically forbid discrimination against women. Article 11 is also of concern to women. It stipulates that the state should preserve ethics and values, including religious values. Analysts say that such vague wording could be used as a “gateway to imposing garb or freedom restrictions or undoing or abolishing previously enacted laws that allowed women the right to divorce; an age limit on marriage for young girls is also absent.”
The draft guarantees freedom of expression, creativity, assembly etc, but it says those rights “must be practiced in a manner not conflicting with” principles of Shariah or the morals of the family. There is also a ban on insulting “religious messengers and prophets,” which has been used in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates to impose strict censorship and policing of the Internet. Christians and Jews are free to practice their rites and establish places of worship, but the new constitution hedges those rights on the condition they do not “violate public order”—another catchall phrase used in the past to prevent the reconstruction or building of churches.
“What has happened in Egypt is an irony of Shakespearean proportion: the jailers are now the prisoners, and the prisoners are now the jailers,” Ayman Nassar commented from Cairo for the BBC. Whereas the old era of the Mubarak regime used to blatantly fake election results, he wrote, the new regime is preying on the illiterate and uneducated: their opinion is easily swayed, whether it be by the preacher at their mosque or the one distributing foodstuffs to them, leading them to believe it was their religious duty to vote in favor of the new constitution: “The persistent and recurring argument against any that seek to deny MB rule is: why are you against Sharia if you are Muslim? Why are you against Islam? … The majority claiming to support the constitution on TV are illiterate and claim they support Islam, further proving the point that they have no idea what machinations exist within the apparently subtle texts of the constitution.”
Last November Morsi issued a decree granting himself unprecedented authority, including immunity to any judicial oversight. His announcement that he could pass any law and take any measure that “advances the Revolution” was revolutionary in itself. It made Mubarak and his two predecessors, Sadat and Nasser, look like scrupulous constitutionalists. It was the Islamist equivalent of the Reich Chancellor’s Enabling Act passed in the aftermath of the Reichstag fire. Secure in the knowledge that the new constitution would be firmly based on Sharia and duly enacted by hook or by crook, Morsi disingenuously claimed that his dictatorial new powers would be temporary, “until a new constitution is approved.” That approval was marred by violence, mass intimidation of Christians and secularists, and many irregularities, but nothing can be done. The protests sparked by Morsi’s decree brought hundreds of thousands of mainly young Egyptians back to Tahrir Square and to the streets of Alexandria and other cities, but this time the regime weathered the storm. The State Department helped by releasing a supine statement urging “all Egyptians to resolve their differences… peacefully and through democratic dialogue.”
Morsi was able to act because in the preceding months the United States had exerted strong pressure on Egypt’s generals not to challenge his assumption of full executive authority. The Administration pretended not to take note of the fact that he came to power because the Muslim Brotherhood broke its pledge to stay out of the presidential race. His first step was to use that authority to reconvene the constitutional assembly previously declared illegal by the courts because it was packed with the Muslim Brotherhood deputies posing as independents.
The game is now over. The rhetoric and tools of “democracy” were adroitly used by the Muslim Brotherhood in line with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s dictum that “democracy is a train—you can get off when you reach your destination.” The result is the kind of Egypt very different from what the Obama Administration and its media cohorts had heralded while supporting Morsi’s rise. Lest we forget, last July Hillary Clinton assured him that the United States was doing all it could to “support the democratically elected government and to help make it a success in delivering results for the people of Egypt.” The “results” now include a constitution that makes mockery of Clinton’s feminist slogans.
The theoretical foundation for what Morsi and his team are trying to achieve was provided by Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), the ideologue of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood who was eventually executed by the Nasser regime. Since all non-Islamic states were illegitimate, Qutb wrote, a self-defining Islamic “vanguard”—obviously inspired by the early Bolshevik model—is needed to wage jihad against them. The Muslim Brotherhood, like the Bolsheviks of yore, explicitly denies the legitimacy of any form of social, political, or cultural organization other than itself. Both were happy to use the tools and rhetoric of “democracy” to attain their objectives.
“Even if exporting democracy could be developed into a workable scenario, the end result would be detrimental to U.S. security: Mubaraq would be swept from power and the Muslim Brotherhood would turn Egypt into an Islamic Republic,” I wrote in Defeating Jihad almost seven years ago. “The maturity and consciousness of voters heralds that Egypt has set on a path of democracy with no return,” Morsi declared in a TV address to the nation on December 27. No return, indeed.
Entries(RSS)
Naturally I concur wholeheartedly with Dr. Trifkovic's scorn toward Western elites who are surprised by this outcome. I would add, though, that some of the commentators he cites give the impression that the masses are being *manipulated* into thinking that being a true Muslim = support for the new constitution.
It seems to me we should emphasize that there is no manipulation about it: If you embrace Islam then this new constitution logically follows. "Why are you against Sharia if you are a Muslim?" is a perfectly sensible question. What is happening represents not subversion of democracy but strict adherence to it.
This article is a nice piece of work. I enjoyed the depth and detail in your description of the Egyptian draft Constitution in particular Mr. Trifkovic. You are correct, it should come as no surprise that a Muslim nation would vote to approve sharia. However, as you mentioned, those hundreds of thousands of protesters didn't disappear. They are still there, as are the millions of other Egyptians who oppose Morsi, the Brotherhood and dictatorial excess. The military, the middle, professional and educated classes and those who depend on the military controlled industries are still, at least potentially, opponents of the new regime. As we have seen, many of them are willing to fight in the streets. This could and probably does mean that Egypt is ripe for civil war. Some might see an opportunity to foment rebellion if they were so inclined and believed it was in their interest to do so. It will be interesting to see how the still powerful military council will behave in the coming months, but I would not bet that they will go softly into that good night. They have too much at stake to simply allow the Brotherhood to take everything they now own. Plus, I doubt if they want to experience the same fate as Mubarak and as long as they control the troops, or most of them and all those industries, they have power enough to resist. Troops, and their extended families who depend for their survival on the fruits of military controlled industry, will not just discard their loyalty to the generals in favor of starvation. So, I guess I'm not willing to conclude that the Egyptian battle for self determination is over, just yet. Egypt, despite it's extremely weak civil institutions and inexperience with civil governance, is not Afghanistan. Egyptians are not cave trolls, many are educated after a fashion. In fact, I would gladly trade them every single member of the U.S. Congress for a nice dose of their fighting spirit. The U.S. is a cooked goose and nobody is saying or doing anything in the streets. And no, those two dozen hippies in OWS don't count and neither do those two dozen tea party something or others. Again, thanks for your fine work.
There is a little chance that your hopes for any kind of turnover may materialize Mr. Taqiyya. The fact that US administration heavily supported "the uprising" with hard currency and arms supply, as well that new funding will be most likely funneled to the Brotherhood accounts, just strengthens Morsi's team position. The Brotherhood has managed to expand their networks in all western countries, misinforming western pubic opinion (less and less interested in far countries constitutional issues), As example, I have written couple of blog comments on Canadian CBC site foreseeing Muslim Brotherhood's hijacking of "revolution" and got tons of replies how the only thing Egyptians want is 'democracy', most likely from young "activists" trained to exercise/abuse tools of democracy.
I am afraid, as Dr. Trifkovic said, there so return for Egypt.
"The U.S. is a cooked goose and nobody is saying or doing anything in the streets."
W.C.,
Gosh, it's always so good to see you!! This "nothing in the street business" is really just fine with me but I did notice recently the GOP conservatives over at the Weekly Standard have made common cause with Congressman Barney Frank and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender folks in order to heap scorn upon the old sergeant and decorated war veteran, even former Senator from Nebraska for saying "war is hell"..... or something to that effect. Now of course that isn't exactly a call to "Occupy Wall Street" , burning the South to the ground, marching through the Middle East or bombing Iran until she glows, but does that kind of stuff count for anything on behalf of patriotism ?
Letters, it is entirely possible that you are correct. However, I did see those protesters force Morsi to recant his premature power grab. That kind of opposition is real and should not be blithely dismissed. I also saw the military not roll their tanks over those protesters. So, as for that military aid you refer to, it wasn't used by and didn't yet benefit Morsi. The generals still control that stuff. For a time. I saw the political gangs on both sides fighting in the streets, as these things are sort of supposed to happen. Like between Brownshirts and Reds in the good old days. These things being revolutions, civil strife, cultural upheaval and what not. In the end, it will come down to who has the most and best armed soldiers. If I wasn't clear, I don't see nirvana coming out the other side of this thing in Egypt. It could be a very bloody mess for a long time. That's what history is full of, bloody strife. I don't believe nirvana, much as I don't believe altruism, can ever be realized. Those ideas are abstract concepts and that is all they are. However, I don't see the Egyptian populace sitting still while a bunch of mullahs, in what passes for Islamic academia, blow up the pyramids either. Blowing up a statue of a long gone culture in caveman land is one thing. Blowing up you own ancient culture is another. The other thing I want to mention is this term "democracy" and whether or not the State Department approves and how many westerners are fooled by Muslim propaganda. None of that matters. Not to Egypt anyway. The U.S. influence in these ME matters is easily overstated and the West is sinking into the sunset. Democracy means what exactly anymore? Who cares? It's power that counts, it always has and always will. The question is, how will that power be organized, apportioned and administered? Let's not get ourselves confused by trite terminology fraught with emotional and frivolous political connotations, shall we?
Hi R.R. Nope, those things don't count for much, except as further confirmation of my conclusion. Of the items in your short list I think only Sherman's march actually accomplished it's purpose. Whether that was a patriotic deed most likely depends on your point of view. Frame of reference is important. My memory of that time is getting hazy with time but I can recall quite distinctly that many of those pesky brigade commanders in the dogmatically independent counties of Georgia and South Carolina refused to fight outside their home county or state. I can't help but wonder if they had been better organized and lead, what a nice fight they might have made of it? Well, no matter, for all of his failures in leadership, Davis will always be good for quotable quotes. Too bad we can't say the same for the rest of his cabinet, what there was of it.
As for the weekly Standard, I don't spend a lot of time reading it. So, I'll take your word that Billy Krystal objects to anything, anyone might say in opposition to war. He is a fun fellow, isn't he? It's hilarious that some self described conservatives spend whatever political influence they have pushing for war, more war and bigger war budgets. On the plus side, they don't mind if the anarchists, nihilists, communists and the entirely wholesome LBGT community dominate the domestic political and cultural discussion. Yep, you can't make this stuff up. Well, you could, but nobody would buy the movie rights to the book.
Interesting isn't it that the whole of America seems to be infused with a dogmatically provincial mind set? You can't be an American, you have to a hyphenated American, if American at all. Not only that, you have to be sure to embellish yourself with pins and descriptive words illuminating for the world at large what you like and what you don't like. And nobody can be complete without at least a vague regional resentment. Yep, I guess a cynical person could say the south did indeed rise again, ain't it grand?
Taqiyya writes: "It's hilarious that some self described conservatives spend whatever political influence they have pushing for war, more war and bigger war budgets."
Well it is real and it is funny, but it's not real funny considering the way they malign those who have done the actual fighting and or dieing. Heck, one can't even disagree with them without readying for an all out character assasination. No wonder things are to the point every man, woman and child would prefer his name be floated in the media before accepting any post for public service.
You also write : "On the plus side, they don't mind if the anarchists, nihilists, communists and the entirely wholesome LBGT community dominate the domestic political and cultural discussion."
As the Editors of Taki Mag recently observed in the hilarious article, "Kicking Can Over The Cliff," it just doesn't matter to these yankee types:
"It’s those Tea Party redneck rural paint-huffing Bible-thumping cousin-humping bigots who aren’t like we are and whose chief sin is that they don’t like people who are different than they are. We all know it’s a scientific fact that those people are only against abortion because they prefer the taste of newborn babies."
Where is old Clyde Wilson when you need him?
A bit of Clyde Wilson, in the older sense of the term, would be nice. But then, I would most probably like that.
We (I) should not be afraid of Robert Reavis either. He is a good solid writer, soldier, writing about good solid things. The heck with that, he is a much better writer and better writers deserve more respect. I was thinking about nirvana when I was thinking about my several dead friends. I can't remember if they were capitalists or democrats. Never mind.