Egypt's sham referendum

Referendums by themselves are not necessarily a sign of democracy at work. In fact, the one taking place in Egypt today is precisely the opposite because it is aimed at creating an autocracy with the country’s notorious army leadership firmly in control.

Not only is the draft constitution anti-democratic in its nature; people trying to campaign against the proposals have been arrested and the opposition effectively banned from the referendum process.

So where are the howls of protest from Washington and the European Union, from London and Paris about a  fake referendum that effectively legitimises the army coup d’état that removed the country’s first elected president in July?

Hypocrisy rules supreme in Western capitals when it comes to real democracy, as we are all too aware. So EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton could issue a statement backing the referendum. Unbelievably she claimed that it could lead to “democratic elections” and “accountability for the government and state institutions”.

Yet the constitution contains nothing of the sort. The new constitution exempts the army, police and intelligence services from civilian control and allows them to prosecute in military courts anyone they deem threatening. Workers rights are curtailed at a time when frequent strikes are taking place as living standards fall.

Little wonder that General Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, who led the coup against the Islamist government of Mohamed Morsi – who is currently in jail awaiting trial for a litany of “offences” - has hinted that he will take a “Yes” vote as a mandate to become Egypt’s next president.

Egypt remains Washington’s key ally in the region and the Obama administration performed linguistic somersaults to avoid labelling the overthrow of Morsi and the banning of his Muslim Brotherhood party a coup. Now its getting ready to resume large-scale aid once the referendum is out of the way.

Hidden in the massive budget bill heading for Congress is a measure that would exempt Egypt from a law requiring a cut off in aid in the event of a military coup. It would allow $1 billion in annual aid to resume if the administration certifies that Egypt “has held a constitutional referendum and is supporting a democratic transition.” More money is promised once the country implements “economic reforms”.

Yet an authoritarian regime now rules Egypt and the referendum won’t change that one jot. Activists who have tried to campaign for a no vote have been arrested and prosecuted on absurd charges. Public demonstrations are banned, and police have killed 27 people and arrested 703 who tried to protest on the past three Fridays, according to Human Rights Watch.

Four of the most famous secular leaders of the 2011 revolution against the Mubarak regime have been jailed on charges of participating in unauthorised demonstrations. Opposition media have been shut down, and journalists from Al Jazeera  imprisoned without charge.

Hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood members have been killed in protests and most of the group’s leaders have been arrested. Last month, the army-backed cabinet designated it as a terror group and said anyone who “promotes it by speech, writing or any other means and all who fund its activities” would be prosecuted.

The three years since the revolution that overthrew Mubarak, and placed Egypt firmly in the centre of the Arab Spring, have seen increasingly desperate attempts by the ruling class to hold on to power. The army, which owns and controls a large part of the economy, is historically an integral part of these capitalist structures and kept Mubarak in power.

When that façade was broken by the 2011 revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood, with its deep roots amongst the downtrodden masses, stepped into the breach. When it began to threaten the military’s privileges, and failed to deliver on promises to improve living standards, it too was removed in order to head off a popular uprising.  

The anger expressed in the Arab Spring has not disappeared. But what has been found wanting is a secular vision and organisation to complete the revolutionary process and transform the existing state. So let’s support those in jail in Egypt who have courageously opposed military rule and the millions who will boycott today’s referendum.

Paul Feldman

Communications editor

Egypt's military ratchets up the misery in Gaza

The military-led Egyptian regime, which yesterday banned the Muslim Brotherhood as well as its political wing which won last year’s elections, is also ensuring that Palestinians cannot escape from the biggest prison camp in the world.

We are talking about Gaza, where 1.6 million people – most of them UN-registered refugees - live in a tiny enclave, with its borders controlled by Egypt and Israel. It’s never been easy getting in and out but things have taken a turn for the worse since the Egyptian army deposed Mohammed Morsi as president and then butchered thousands of his supporters.

The military regime accused the Hamas government in Gaza of being in league with the Muslim Brotherhood government. This slender allegation has been used as a pretext to impose draconian controls on the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt. Tunnels formerly used to bring goods into Gaza – they have been a lifeline – have been collapsing on top of the smugglers.

The United Nations’ Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says only an average of 150 people per day have been allowed to cross into Egypt after its authorities closed the Rafah crossing following the July coup. This was just 15% of the number of people allowed to cross in June.

One of the consequences of the Egyptian-imposed blockade is that money is running short in Gaza and, as a result, importing goods from Israel has also slowed to a trickle. Gazans requiring medical treatment in Egypt have also been affected by the closure.

The Egyptian crackdown has sent the Islamic-inspired Hamas government into a tailspin. It is desperately trying to avoid a confrontation with the Egyptian military. Initially, Hamas condemned the “terrible massacres” in Egypt following the overthrow of Morsi.

Since then, backtracking has been the order of the day. Earlier this month, Gaza's prime minister Ismail Haniya condemned "attempts to draw the resistance into sideline battles away from the [real] enemy [Israel]". He added: "The government is not steering the people towards fighting Egypt or towards aggression against any state, regardless of the unprecedented pressure and circumstances the Palestinian people are under."

Adnan Abu Amr of Umma University in Gaza, said: "Hamas faces a crisis and strangulation that is forcing it to step back and minimise the chances of a clash with Egypt. (They hope) this will stop any unexpected Egyptian moves.. The situation "requires that Hamas appear flexible. Standing up to the Egyptian army is not in their interest."

For ordinary Gazans, the situation remains bleak. As students all round the world settle down for their new year, spare a thought for Manar Alzray, 23, an honours graduate in English language and education. She had planned to continue her education in Canada, where a foundation generously granted her $62,000 to take up a place at Trent University.

But the closing of the Rafah crossing prevented her from completing all the formalities at the Canadian embassy in Cairo. Her online application hit some technical problems and the term has started without her.

“Yet, I have not lost hope,” says Alzray, who has received some of the best grades and test scores in Gaza. “My application to Edinburgh has been pushed to next year, and I am currently applying to Oxford University and the University of Cambridge as well. Next year, I am determined to be in Britain. I will have a pocket full of money and I will hold my head up high. I will be happy, and so will my parents. In 10 years, I will be telling my children this story and laugh at the hard times.”

Let’s hope she’s right. But with the Israeli government continuing to block any movement towards an independent Palestine with its settlement programme and the US-backed and financed Egyptian military regime engaged in its own crackdown, optimism is in short supply.

Paul Feldman

Communications editor

Chemical blame game over Syria disguises the real issues

In the aftermath of parliament’s rebuff to prime minister Cameron’s proposed attack on Syria, Barack Obama has been forced to acknowledge the mass opposition to military action.

The legacy of recent debacles in Iraq, Afghanistan and the intervention in Libya continue to haunt large numbers of people, including top military brass.

It is evident that externally-backed regime change in these countries has achieved no benefits, either for their populations or for ordinary citizens in the United States or Britain.

Obama's hesitation about striking Syria is as much to do with popular distaste for war after more than a decade of body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan as it is to do with the timing of G20 summit that takes place in Moscow later this week.

Of course, Cameron and Obama hope to give their tarnished democratic credentials a polish by subordinating themselves to the decisions of elected bodies – parliament and the US Congress.

But meanwhile, the pro-attack faction in parliament – including the vociferous former Lib-Dem leader, Lord Paddy Ashdown - is marshalling forces for a possible second vote. US secretary of state John Kerry is declaring that Obama has the authority to act without Congressional approval.

Much energy is being spent trying to pin down responsibility for the chemical attack in Damascus. Shocking images are published and the US claims to have proof that the regime is responsible.

But the issue of chemical weapons – the “red line that must not be crossed” as Obama put it – is actually a secondary issue to the fundamental question: do the major powers have the “right” to attack Syria?

The debate over who is using the chemical weapons – the Assad regime or those fighting against it – begs the real question: is military intervention

a solution to the misery of the Syrian people? And is it justified in any case?

And does opposition to bombing Assad’s military installations imply support for him?

Absolutely not in response to every question!

The all-important distinction is between the Assad and the Syrian people who have courageously opposed his noxious regime for decades, even while the US, Britain et al were wheeler dealing with Damascus in their power games.

What about the all-important the right to self-determination of the Syrian people themselves? It is as if they don’t exist except as victims whom we must pity.

But a large part of the disposed and poor Syrian people rose up against Assad in the Arab spring of 2011, which undermined autocratic regimes, from Tunisia to Egypt. (How many people know, for example, that in July 2011, the Syrian Revolution 2011 Facebook page had over 218,000 followers?)

Of course, their hope that the Assad regime would fall quickly was mistaken. It is backed by Russia (which has a naval base in the country). Moscow has been supplied arms to Syria for decades.

Although Tehran would seem to have little in common with the secular Syrian regime, it too has supported Assad, sending him money to pay for Russian hardware, because his opponents are predominantly Sunni Muslims by contrast with the Shia Muslims in Iran.

Underneath the conflict in Syria is a class division in which the state oppresses its people. These divisions are now masked over by the sectarian religious divide, spurred on and armed by Saudi Arabia, the US and Britain and elements of Al Qaeda on the one side, with Iran and Russia on the other. 

The democratic and social aspirations of Syrians, whatever their religious or non-religious allegiances, like those of Egyptians are totally ignored by most media and commentators.

In the meantime, we say an unconditional “No” to any attacks on Syria. This does not mean giving succour to the Assad regime. As Irfan Ahmad has pointed out, in the Arab states, as elsewhere, the urgent need is to encourage and develop a democratic secular alternative.

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

Army rule in Egypt rejected by new movement

With the brutal murder of 74 – probably more - pro-Morsi supporters and persecution of thousands of Muslim Brotherhood members by the army leadership, the Egyptian revolution enters a dangerous and crucial phase.

The shootings on Friday night by Egypt’s military have been condemned by Human Rights Watch as targeted killings by snipers. Minister of Defence and coup leader general Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s call for support in dealing with “terrorism”, gave the army the green light to deal brutally with the Brotherhood.

Live rounds were fired directly into protesters’ heads and chests from buildings overlooking the Muslim Brotherhood’s sit-in in Rabaa al-Adawiya in eastern Cairo. Brotherhood supporters are demanding the release of detained former president Mohammed Morsi – elected after the fall of Mubarak - during a 30-day sit-in and are clearly prepared to die to achieve their objective.

But a new movement, the Third Square, has emerged in the city of Giza, which represents people-revolutionaries who support neither the military’s June 30 coup nor Morsi’s regime.

One of the protesters,  Ahmed Adel, said: "We are a group of young people whose views are not represented either in Tahrir Square or Rabaa al-Adawiya." He was critical of Egyptians being forced to choose between two camps "just because the Muslim Brotherhood failed" saying that he wants neither "religious fascism nor the army." 

Meanwhile, Fatma Ramadan, a member of the executive committee of the Egyptian Federation of Independent Trade Unions (EFITU), has denounced the EFITU's decision to support al-Sisi's call for pro-military demonstrations as well as the Muslim Brotherhood’s attack on Egyptian workers and trade unions, saying: 

“Did not the military forcibly end your strikes in Suez, Cairo, Fayyoum, and all over Egypt ? Did not the military arrest many of you and subject you to military trials just for practising your right to organize, strike, and protest peacefully? Have they not adamantly worked to criminalize this right through legislation banning all Egyptians from organising peaceful protests, strikes, and sit-ins? Do not be fooled into replacing a religious dictatorship with a military dictatorship.” 

The new status quo has been satirised by anti-Mubarak film-maker, Aalam Wassef. He has made a surreal music video in which he does his laundry in front of a banner saying “Resist”.  The pre-Mubarak world has been turned upside in two years, he says.

The former revolutionaries, Wassef’s song goes, are now members of the Couch Party, while the Brotherhood are now the “felool” – the remnants of the old regime, and the old regime – the army – is playing at being revolutionaries.

Many hailed the removal of the elected government of Morsi in June by Egypt’s powerful army leaders as a victory for the people. But Egypt’s army officers, as Jadaliyya website says, “are promoting a narrative in which they have (once again) intervened heroically to save the day and ‘protect the revolution’.”

Meanwhile, the demands for bread, freedom and social justice, which lay behind the revolutionary toppling of Hosni Mubarak’s 30-year autocracy in February 2011, remain unfulfilled.

The January 25 revolution – and indeed the Egyptian revolution itself – goes far deeper than the search for an elected government. As far as Jadaliyya is concerned, “it encompassed a host of demands for far-reaching institutional reforms and social and economic rights”.

The partisans of “bread, freedom, and social justice” represent a huge swathe of people-revolutionaries who back neither the Brotherhood nor the army. Egyptian writer Khaled Alkhamissi, author of the prophetic novels Noah’s Ark and Taxi, which foretold the fall of Mubarak, said last week:

 “We are living in a vibrant social era in Egypt. . . We are not in a process of transformation from A to B, as representative democracy is dying everywhere. We need to properly analyse the revolutionary process that has been going on for almost ten years ... and we need a manifesto of demands.”

The Third Square and Egypt’s revolutionaries face the challenge of moving beyond subversion and resistance.  The battle is on to grasp the nettle of state power. That means creating new democratic political and social institutions that can express the needs of Egypt’s workers, farmers, professional people and youth.

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

Egypt's unfinished revolution

Egypt is experiencing the throes of the third phase of its political and social revolution. Tanks have been ordered onto the streets of Cairo. And a new concrete wall is going up in the street leading to the presidential palace.

As a struggle for power grips the country, Egypt’s opposition has decided to boycott the constitutional referendum being forced through by the ruling Muslim Brotherhood despite the concessions offered by president Mohamed Morsi.

In massive protests five people were killed and over 200 injured, many by supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood in orchestrated attacks. More demonstrations are planned for tomorrow against plans to push ahead with the referendum.

Although Morsi has rescinded most of the powers he had grabbed on 22 November in a decree in which he had set himself above the law, he has now allied himself with the leadership of the armed forces in a desperate bid to cling to power.

Demonstrations around the country accused him of  “stealing the country” and following in the footsteps of deposed president Hosni Mubarak. Some six Morsi advisers abandoned him last week and largely moderate Islamic academics at Al-Azhar university called for the measures to be rescinded.

Essam al-Amir, the head of Egyptian state television has resigned and journalists working for the state media channels have sided with the street. One female broadcaster even held a shroud in front of the cameras, recalling those who had died in the 2011 revolution to overthrow Mubarak. The crisis within the media – attacked for not showing the massive protests - extended to Egyptian Al Jazeera.

Morsi’s backdown on the decree granting him pharaonic dictatorial powers was intended to defuse the raging political crisis. In fact, it is leading to greater turmoil. The military has been given “extraordinary” powers through a 15-member national defence council.

Playing cards with the devil, Morsi hopes that by aligning himself with the military – which still owns and controls large parts of the Egyptian economy – it will continue to defend him and his regime.

Morsi’s new constitution would give increased powers to Muslim clerics by making them arbiters for many civil rights, and provide a constitutional basis for citizens to set up Saudi-style religious police. These would monitor morals and enforce segregation of the sexes, impose  Islamic dress codes and mete out punishments for “crime” like adultery, regardless of what secular law states. 

It has been strongly criticised by the United Nations Human Rights commissioner, Navi Pillai. She said it would concentrate powers in the hands of the president, undermine the independence of the judiciary and weaken a range of international treaties that protect civil and political rights.

Within Egypt, critics argue that the constitution drafting process was not representative of the country, especially after numerous groups, including women’s rights organizations, Coptic Christians and liberal leaders withdrew after saying the Islamists would not compromise on any issue.

Running alongside the crisis over the referendum, is widespread anger over November’s negotiations over the $4.8 billion International Monetary Fund loan to Egypt. Many believe that Morsi smuggled through its agreement with the IMF under the cover of the Gaza crisis. Part of this was a new round of tax rises on popular items, which Morsi has now withdrawn – at least for the time being.

Morsi’s floundering regime is walking a fine line between the army and massive popular anger. This is indeed an expression of the incomplete Egyptian revolution. Some describe the present moment as Egypt 3.0.

As Adam Hanieh, wrote in an article by for the ezine Jadaliyya, in the months following Mubarak’s overthrow: “The uprising cannot be reduced to a question of ‘democratic transition’ –precisely because the political form of the Egyptian state under Mubarak was a direct reflection of the nature of capitalism in the country, the uprising implicitly involved a challenge to the position of these elites.”

In the end, defending and extending the Egyptian revolution is not about setting a Muslim Egypt versus a secular Egypt, but solving the question of power so that the mass of the people control their lives, their economy and their state.  

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

Divide and rule in Greece and Egypt

The sigh of relief expressed by the financial markets and the major capitalist governments over the outcome of the Greek election reveals how desperate the ruling elites are for any “good news”, however ephemeral it proves to be.

The crisis of the euro is now centred on Spain, the fifth largest economy in Europe, which now faces sovereign bankruptcy as well as debt-ridden banks. And next in line is Italy.

Whatever the right-wing New Democracy-led government cobbles together, the fact is that the Greek economy has been smashed, working people can take no more austerity measures and basic supplies like medicine are drying up.

So nothing is different this morning, except that Syriza, which wanted to renegotiate the draconian bail-out terms, did not win. The Brussels bureaucracy and German chancellor Merkel were terrified that an “unreliable” left coalition might come to power in Greece, just as the euro is in its deepest ever crisis.

But it remains a narrow victory for the New Democracy, Greece’s conservative party, which garnered only 3% more of the vote than the Syriza left coalition. Party leader Antonis Samaras is now in negotiations to form a coalition with the Pasok pseudo-Socialist Party, which received 12%, in an attempt to increase his majority – in advance of either party’s agreement to the talks.

Real fear spread in the commanding heights of Europe after the May 6 general election in Greece when the Syriza party, lead by Alexis Tsipras, appeared out of nowhere to gain some 17% of the vote. Syriza’s share of the vote has risen to 27%, thus bucking the notion that European voters cannot be enthusiastic about a left radical party.

Syriza is a coalition of 13 groups including democratic socialists, euro-communists, Marxists and greens. It is, however, pro-European Union as well as in favour of staying in the euro and simply wanted to ease the burden on the Greek people.

Tapping into the suffering caused by the harsh terms of the bailout, Tsipras has won over public sector workers many of whom have received no wages for months, unemployed young people and Greeks of many political complexions who feel they have nothing to lose by taking a chance.  

Meanwhile, in Egypt, the military has effectively seized power as the country awaits the result of the presidential election. It has issued a declaration granting itself sweeping powers. The document by the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (Scaf) says new general elections cannot be held until a permanent constitution is drawn up. It also gives the Scaf legislative control.

On the eve of the elections, under the influence of pro-Mubarak judges, Egypt’s Constitutional Court, dissolved parliament. Emergency laws were then revived, which give the military free rein to arrest civilians without reference to the courts.

It is a pre-emptive coup d’état by Egypt’s “deep state” – the military-economic establishment – has moved to forcibly end the dual power situation that has prevailed in Egypt since Mubarak’s overthrow by a mass uprising last year.

The two candidates in the election both stood for reaction. On the one side, the Muslim Brotherhood Mohamed Mursi, on the other, the continuation of  Mubarak's “deep state” through prime minister Ahmed Shafiq. So in the absence of a real choice. In both rounds, voters opted for the candidate who would best counteract the contender they do not want. In other words, “the lesser of two evils”.

Have we seen the exercise of the people’s will in either of these elections?  In Greece, even though 55% of voters opposed the pro bail-out parties, the country now has a pro bail-out government! In Egypt, the army is determined to retain control – whatever the outcome of the presidential election while dissolving parliament altogether.

Elections have made no difference in either country to decide who truly holds power. The elections were in fact a form of democracy denied, with serving to polarise and divide society and allow the elites to stay in power – a form of “divide and rule”.  The conclusion?  If there ever was a time to create new forms of democratic expression such as people’s assemblies, it is now.

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

there

Egypt's military provokes sectarian clashes

Tensions between Christians and Muslims are being stoked up by Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces in the run-up to parliamentary elections in November and January. Senior army figures are determined to cling to power whichever way they can.

The number of casualties after a police-army crackdown on Coptic Christians last night has risen to at least 24 killed and hundreds injured on the streets of Cairo. The ruling military council imposed a curfew as protesters snatched weapons from police and hurled stones at them.

Provocateurs were clearly at work, as plainclothes thugs with protection from the police and military attacked the mainly Coptic demonstrators. A peaceful protest-sit down at the state television building in the centre of Cairo was quelled by ferocious and co-ordinated assault.

Anger had been simmering in southern Egypt ever since the Marinab Coptic Christian church in Aswan was demolished on 30 September. Coptic Christians are the largest religious minority in the Middle East and make up around 9% of Egypt’s population of over 80 million people.

The attacks on Egypt’s native Christians are a reversion to the blatant religious discrimination practised by the ousted Mubarak regime. The 25 January Youth Coalition has called for unity between Muslims and Christians, and the Egyptian Social Democratic Party has attacked the military council. But the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party has blamed both Coptic protesters and the military.

Prime minister, Essam Sharaf, Egypt’s first post-revolution Prime Minister, has written on his cabinet’s Facebook page that “invisible hands are plotting to partition Egypt” with "attempts to spark chaos and strife among the homeland sons," in an attempt to defuse tension. Sharaf has called an emergency meeting with the “ministerial crisis management committee” for today.

Protesters marched on Egyptian state television in the Maspiro district of Cairo when it only reported police casualties but said nothing about the ferocious attack on the protesters. Three news producers on state TV had denounced their own channel’s bias, and accused them of “sectarian incitement”. As clashed continued around Tahrir Square, a prominent Coptic activist, Naguib Gobrail was reported a injured. Thugs were seen throwing rocks at protesters.

Eye witnesses saw armoured vehicles driving straight through crowds of protesters. In one place 15 people were crushed. The bodies taken to Coptic Maspiro and Abbasseya had injuries showing they had been killed by massive force. Security forces followed the wounded to hospitals and prevented journalists and relatives from entering.

Al-Hurra television’s Cairo office was stormed by military police searching for Coptic demonstrators and to prevent the channel airing its news programme last night. (Al-Hurra is a US Congress-funded satellite network which broadcasts in 22 Middle East countries). The offices of private TV25 television channel were also attacked and closed down by police, who demanded that journalists show their ID cards to see if they were Christian. Solidarity protests took place in four other regions, including Alexandria.

As the Guardian’s Jack Shenker writes from Egypt: “Egypt's beleaguered Coptic community, who have known from the early days of the anti-Mubarak uprising that those seeking to protect the status quo would try their hardest to sow social instability as a precursor for rolling back revolutionary gains – and that with a current of genuine communal distrust often bubbling away below the surface, sectarian tension would be the easiest of targets.”

When a political regime is in crisis, provoking religious and ethnic clashes is par for the course, as history has shown time and again. The state-sponsored attack on Egypt’s Coptic Christians confirms that the Egypt’s political revolution is in danger.

The issues of unemployment, poverty and discrimination that drove the January revolution forward remain. They cannot be tackled while the discredited army leadership, which was in Mubarak’s pay and owns large chunks of the economy, remains in control.

The ousting of Mubarak must be continued by people’s assemblies taking action to oust his remaining cronies and the military council for good.

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

Egypt’s unfinished revolution

The future of the Middle East is being fought out in Cairo's Tahrir Square. The Egyptian people’s determined struggle for economic and political freedom against a regime of dictators and torturers goes on.

Their 14-day struggle is fuelling the flames of revolt throughout the Arab world, from Gaza and the West Bank where Hamas and the Palestine Authority have banned protests, to Yemen and Jordan.

So, is the drama being played out in Egypt and reverberating throughout the Arab world, a true revolution? The answer must be an unequivocal Yes.

Not only in Cairo but throughout the country, millions have been involved in demonstrations and, equally crucial, in organising barricades to enforce security and stop provocations by Mubarak and his secret police.

Does the revolution need to go further to truly succeed in its aims of bringing political and economic freedom to the majority of Egyptians? The answer is also a decisive Yes.

The Egyptian ruling classes backed by an equivocating United States, want to preserve Egyptian capitalism. They are playing a war of attrition, hoping that the “silent majority” will tire of disruption and will remain neutral or even back the ruling elite with or without Mubarak at their head.

The keys to real power remain in the hands of the regime. It controls the rubber stamp parliament, the television and official media and the army. Those occupying Tahrir Square are only too aware that the army is the decisive factor in Egyptian politics.

They have climbed up on the tanks and greeted the soldiers as their allies. At present protesters are sleeping and camping under the tanks. They see the army as their protection against Mubarak’s thugs. After all it was the army under Abdel Nasser who overthrew the Egyptian monarchy in the 1952 revolution. But the history of revolutions – and of Egypt itself – shows that this is a perilous path. In no way can the army, even though it consists mostly of conscripted workers, be relied upon to support those demanding the end of not only Mubarak but his entire state apparatus, including the hundreds of thousands of secret police, spies and torturers. The army has done very well under Mubarak. Last year the Egyptian armed forces received over $1.3 billion from his US backers.

Over the weekend, Vice President Omar Suleiman, Mubarak’s intelligence chief, met with opposition leaders and is likely to announce that a new constitution is being drafted. Amongst the 50 people who took part in the discussions were members of the hitherto-outlawed Muslim Brotherhood. Many have suffered imprisonment and torture at the hands of Mubarak’s army of spies and torturers and had only just been freed last week. But the Brotherhood originally refused to support the anti-government demonstrations and is only now trying to regain its credibility.

Egypt’s uprising is indeed virtually leaderless. A new generation who have known nothing but Mubarak’s repressive regime broke unexpectedly onto the world stage. Initially inspired by the revolutionary events in Tunisia, young people have organised through Facebook, following the call of Asmaa Mahfouz and Ahmed Maher in the April 6 Youth Movement, which campaigned for the Million March on February 1. Many, including the newly-formed Centre for Trade Union and Workers’ Services, are rightly demanding the dissolution of the current parliament, 97% of whose seats are controlled by Mubarak’s National Democratic Party.

The Egyptian revolution had to break free of its old leadership elites to challenge the dictatorship. The urgent need is for the spontaneous movements, including the community-run barricades, to develop a strategy for economic and political power through people’s assemblies.

Corinna Lotz
A World to Win secretary

Mubarak's 'war on terror'

Under the guise of combatting terrorism, Egypt’s People’s Assembly is today rubber-stamping a vote on constitutional amendments designed to turn the country into a police state. Yesterday 100 MPs walked out of parliament as voting was due to take place. But people in Egypt could not see the protest because television cameras were banned. On Saturday demonstrators confronted riot police and plainclothes agents in Cairo’s central Tahir Square.

President Hosni Mubarak, who has been in power for 25 years, is notorious for his suppression of political dissent, including the detention of bloggers, who have joined numerous other prisoners held under "emergency laws".

Muslim Brotherhood MPs boycotted the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the Peoples Assembly and joined with the Wafd Party, the leftist Tagammu Party, the Nasserist Karama movement and independent MPs to oppose the constitutional changes.The amendments are to be put to a popular referendum in April. The government claims that a third of Egypt’s 78 million people will vote. But in the view of leading bloggers, the turn-out could be as low as 2 per cent. But no one is in doubt of the outcome. The constitutional changes will weaken the role of judges in monitoring elections and give police greater powers of arrest and wide authority to monitor private communications. Those branded as “terrorists” lose the right to trial before a judge and will be tried by military tribunals. At present the label of terrorism is applied even to modern Islamist politicians including the Muslim Brotherhood and others.

Even before this latest move by the Mubarak regime, Egypt’s Association for the Assistance of Prisoners has said that human rights conditions in Eygpt are even worse than those documented in a US Bureau of Democracy Report published on March 6, which documented torture and killings in police stations.

The MB operates openly despite being banned since 1954, but last week over 80 members of the Muslim Brotherhood were detained after the group said it was boycotting the parliamentary vote on the amendments.Mubarak’s government will use what has been described as a “constitutional coup” to stop the Muslim Brotherhood before it makes electoral gains. President Mubarak wants a smooth transfer of power to his son Gamal and the increasing popularity of the MB stands in his way. Members of the Brotherhood running as independents hold nearly one-fifth of the 454-seat lower house of parliament.

Amongst those at the Cairo demonstration on Saturday were members of the Kifayah (Enough!) movement. One Kifayah leader said: “These are not constitutional amendments, it’s a constitutional coup. The aim is to block the remaining channels of democratic participation and resistance, and the ability of the judiciary to address wrongs in the system. The government’s aim is to gain complete control of elections.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to becoming Egypt’s largest opposition was aided and abetted initially by British imperialism in its campaign against Nasser’s revolutionary movement. Subsequently it worked with Sadat, Mubarak and the CIA to destroy sorely needed secular and socialist alternatives. Mubarak’s latest lurch to dictatorship shows that he is playing with fire and will only strengthen the hand of reactionary religious movements.

Corinna Lotz, AWTW Secretary