New economic decisions are hailed as revolutionary. Others are not as euphoric. Aziza Sami covers the two opposing views The national press over the week greeted the new tariff reductions announced by the government as "revolutionary" in the words of the daily Al-Akhbar 's Editor Galal Dowidar on Friday. On Thursday the newspaper proclaimed in its banner, "Comprehensive tariff cuts in favour of the consumer and a 20 per cent reduction for income categories ranging from LE300 to LE800", the latter to be implemented in July. Al- Ahram sought to emphasise that the aim was to "alleviate the burden on limited income groups". However, on Friday the opposition daily Al-Wafd proclaimed in its banner that the tariff reductions were a "ploy" and alleged that the increase in prices of diesel fuel -- commonly referred to in Egypt as solar -- announced along with the tariff reductions, would bring in "LE25 billion to the government compared to meagre tariff cuts which will cost it only LE3 billion!" Al-Wafd chose to sarcastically highlight that among the commodities upon which tariffs have been reduced are "lobsters and shrimp" which never figure on the ordinary Egyptians' shopping list. However, Al-Wafd notably changed its tune when it quoted Wafdist MP Mounir Fakhri Abdel-Nour, who is also a prominent businessman, in its banner as saying: "The tariffs reduction is a correct step to break out of the recession." Abdel-Nour qualified this by saying: "There must also be a monetary policy preventing sudden exchange rate fluctuations, and transparency in reform, thereby putting an end to the current discrepancies in assessments and figures." Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed, who was in Alexandria last week to give two public lectures, received accolades in virtually every single publication whether national, independent or opposition. In the national weekly magazine Al- Musawwar Editor-in-Chief Makram Mohamed Ahmed wrote: "Over two days Mahathir Mohamed most eloquently summed up the marvellous Malaysian experiment. This is the man who in the span of 30 years transformed Malaysia from a simple agricultural economy to an advanced industrial one with sustained high rates of growth. With unprecedented courage he refused a globalisation which wants to force its culture on others. A tribute must be directed to those who invited him to come, realising the importance of Egyptians listening to Mahathir Mohamed especially at this moment in time." Mahathir also inspired admiration for his voluntary stepping down from power despite his unchallenged status as the father of the "Malaysian miracle" and allowing for a change of rule through democratic elections. The opposition weekly Al-Arabi issued by the Nasserist Party thus proclaimed in a front-page headline, "The Egyptians applauded Mahathir when he said: 22 years of rule is enough." The precursor of a new struggle between the Awqaf (Religious Endowments) Ministry and Al-Azhar clergy could be gleaned over the issue of "regulating" the call for prayer in mosques. On Frinday both the independent daily Nahdet Masr and Al-Akhbar carried interviews with Awqaf Minister Mahmoud Hamdi Zaqzouq in which he divulged plans to "unify the call to prayer" in Greater Cairo mosques by means of recorded tapes of the azan performed by "well-known muezzins with beautiful voices". This, Zaqzouq explained, would be the first step towards regulating what has become a chaotic situation in which anyone can raise the call for prayer, creating a cacophony of jarring sounds not in accord with the spirituality of the azan. Nahdet Masr pointed out that the minister's plan has "raised a storm in religious circles who say it goes against Shariaa (religious law) and is an attempt to control mosques and curtail their independence". Abdel-Sabbour Shahin, a professor of Shariaa was quoted as saying the plan is "part of US attempts to 'minimise' Islam in Egypt since it already tried to cancel the existence of small mosques in buildings and limit the overall number of mosques in Egypt". However, the weekly national magazine Rose El- Youssef published on Saturday: "We support the [awqaf minister] and reject ugliness and sounds distorting the image of Islam. The principle of regulating prayer is a civilised one opposed only by militants." Al-Akhbar quoted the awqaf minister as saying, "Many people are afraid to complain about the noise emanating from mosques since they might be accused of being 'against Islam'. Religion should be a source of happiness, not disturbance and terrorising." The question of terrorism in the name of Islam continued to invoke commentary. The Beslan school massacre in particular induced articles highlighting the impact the killings were bound to have on relations between Russia and the Arab world. "We will regret it if 'friendly Russia' turns against us," proclaimed Rose El-Youssef in an article interviewing several prominent diplomats. Former head of the Arab League Esmat Abdel-Meguid was quoted by the magazine as saying, "Israel took advantage of recent terrorist acts in Russia to forge a security agreement with Israel." A former ambassador to the Soviet Union, Murad Ghaleb, added: "The fact that there are countries with vested interests in tarnishing Islam's image does not absolve these groups of their responsibility." In a sequel to his article last week, Editor-in-Chief Mohamed Abdel- Moneim wrote, "The terrorism of worshipping death and hating life," saying, "as expected, because of the Beslan horror, a prominent and influential journalist like David Brookes of the New York Times wrote an article, 'The worshipping of death'. "Brookes did not limit his writing to the terrorist criminals (who committed this act) but included all Arabs and Muslims, accusing them of choosing death, murder and hatred over life and the sanctity which should be accorded it." Al-Musawwar' s Makram Mohamed Ahmed questioned in his opening article, "Does Islam bear the brunt of crimes committed by these groups?" The magazine's cover carried a photograph of the 12 Nepalese hostages massacred by one such "Islamic" group, an image which recurred in several other publications. Ahmed recommended, "Cairo would do well if it called once again for a regional Islamic conference to be attended by Islamic authorities... from the [Iranian city of] Qom, the Negev, Mecca and Medina to put a stop to this incursion on Islam and its intellectual legacy by groups carrying Islamic names while committing savage acts. This has made Islam an opportune enemy of the global superpowers." In response to Ahmed's question in an article last week as to why the usually articulate Minister of Housing Ibrahim Suleiman is so silent on the campaign currently being waged upon him, the minister told Al-Musawwar that he had been advised by his lawyers to keep silent but could not resist adding, "How can people accuse me of conspiring against [Mamdouh] Hamza in London? Do they think Scotland Yard is like Bulaq or Sayyida Zeinab station so that I can have clout there?" In July, Hamza, a prominent engineer, was accused of soliciting to murder four high-ranking Egyptian officials, including Suleiman. He is currently out on bail in London and is prevented from leaving the city. In any case, Suleiman broke his silence this week when he gave interviews to Al-Ahram and the independent weekly Al-Osbou. The minister told both publications that the suits filed against him were old and had been settled in the courts six years ago. He asserted, "There is a conspiracy against me to divert attention from the case of Mamdouh Hamza," and added, "A gang of businessmen is behind this campaign." Unmoved, Al-Arabi on Sunday demanded "the investigation of Ibrahim Suleiman by the public prosecutor". The newspaper said it possesses "documents presented by Mamdouh Hamza including allegations of rampant nepotism and corruption which must be looked into by all regulatory agencies." The apparently failed deal to import Sudanese meat to Egypt also featured prominently this week. Writing in Al- Ahram, columnist Salah Montasser pointed to reports that a deal negotiated by the Egyptian government to import 30,000 tons of meat from the Sudan at a low cost was apparently preempted by a cartel of Egyptian meat importers who naturally did not want to see such a deal concluded.
