The anniversary of Egypt's 23 July Revolution this year will be marked by fresher memories of the 25 January Revolution, writes Dina Ezzat On the balcony of her old, but still beautiful, house in the once up-market neighbourhood of Manial overlooking the Nile in Cairo sits 77-year-old Wagida, looking frail but having perfect mental faculties and memory. "It was my last year of high school. We were in Alexandria for the summer holidays, and in the late afternoon or early evening the news came through. The first thing I thought about was the result of my high school diploma, and I was really worried that they would not announce it or that something would go wrong," she says with a smile, sharing her recollections of 23 July 1952. For Wagida and her family, who made their living in business, nothing went wrong. Emphatically Wagida stresses that "things continued as normal, for the most part. I remember that in the months that followed the revolution people were not sure exactly what was happening in politics, but we were certain that the transition of power had been made." "We went to visit the royal train stations in Cairo and Alexandria that were opened by the revolution to the public, for example. But most important of all, there was no such thing as security hazards. People didn't stay awake at night with sticks and guns to protect their houses. Order was kept in Egypt." For Wagida, whose reference to the revolution indicates the 23 July Revolution, the security problems that followed the "January demonstrations", as she refers to the 25 January Revolution, are the most basic and indicative difference between the two revolutions. In the July Revolution, she says, order replaced chaos. THEN AND NOW: "Chaos, frequent cabinet reshuffles and all of that came before the revolution in 1952. After the revolution, there was political gossip, but there was also order. Now, things are the other way around. Before 25 January, there was order, despite the problems, the injustice and the corruption, and now we are living in chaos." Wagida is particularly annoyed that she and her husband Lutfi will have to move to the house of her elder daughter to spare her family concerns over their personal security. Their children and grandchildren, who used to trust them to live on their own with a house-help, are now concerned for their safety due to the predominant insecurity. If the elderly couple insists on going to their own house for a few days, then they go to Manial from the Al-Rehab Residential Compound at the other end of Cairo accompanied by a grandchild. "I have just been demonstrating in front of the Ministry of Interior against the continued absence of any form of security," says George Ishaq, a political activist who for many years campaigned against the regime of toppled former president Hosni Mubarak. "The traffic is a mess, citizens are not safe, and people are afraid." Speaking to the Weekly earlier this week amid confused news of the cabinet reshuffle and the temporary, or maybe not so temporary, reappointment of some of the former ministers, Ishaq argues that the "chaos has to come to an end and order be put in its place." During this year's revolution, on the evening of 28 January and after having used considerable brutality against unarmed demonstrators for three full days after the beginning of the demonstrations on the afternoon of 25 January, the police disappeared from the streets of Egypt's towns and cities, leaving rampant insecurity behind, together with accounts of the brutality that had left close to 1,000 young people killed. For Lutfi this is another big difference between the two revolutions. "You can say all you want about the mistakes of King Farouk, but at the end of the day you have to admit that when the time came he realised that it was over for him and that he had to leave," said the 79-year-old retired lawyer. "With the July Revolution there was no violence and no blood and not one person was killed," he added, promptly thanking the Almighty for the fact that none of his grandchildren, who had gone to Tahrir Square, was hurt. The account of a regime succumbing to political facts, whether it liked them or not, has little to do with the closing chapters of the three-decade rule of former president Mubarak. Violence did mark the first few days of the 18-day revolution that only ended on 11 February when Mubarak finally decided to step down and nominate the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) to run the country in his stead. FROM TAHRIR SQUARE: "From the heart of the 25 January Revolution -- Egypt is again under the Sun" is the title of an account contributed by prominent novelist Ibrahim Abdel-Meguid to The Book of the Revolution, a publication which gives detailed witness statements, photographs and cartoons of the January Revolution. In his account, Abdel-Meguid tells the story of thugs finding their way into the heart of the demonstrations in Tahrir Square before throwing stones at the police, who in turn started a counter-attack as the state-run radio and TV stations announced news of a scheme by the Muslim Brotherhood to topple the regime, "typically using the Islamist scarecrow" to frighten the population. "After midnight on Tuesday 25 January, the police launched a massive operation to terminate the demonstrations and randomly arrested hundreds of people whether they were demonstrators or not," Abdel-Meguid wrote. On 28 January, "The Friday of Anger", the police, Abdel-Meguid continues, were blocking all the roads leading to Tahrir Square to prevent the anticipated massive demonstration, even as the demonstrators continued to occupy the Square despite the tear gas and the water cannons. Abdel-Meguid and a group of other writers and intellectuals found their way to the famous downtown Café Riche in order to recover from the effects of tear gas. A little later, the novelist decided to walk down with his wife, only to be chased away by police officers and by "the thugs let loose by the police". The latter nearly caught them, before they found refuge in the downtown house of a middle-class family. A MIXED BAG: The blend of individuals of different political affiliations, or of no political affiliations at all, was the predominant feature of Tahrir Square during the January Revolution, the only spot on which nationwide demonstrations took place. "The middle class was the main feature of this revolution -- people having different interests and different religious affiliations made this revolution, or at least started this revolution," says political analyst Amr Hashem Rabie, whose Egypt Affairs Unit at the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies kept detailed records of the January Revolution. According to prominent historian and jurist Tarek El-Beshri, author of Democracy and the Regime of 23 July, the middle class, whether lower and upper, was at the root of the Free Officers Movement that toppled King Farouk, and especially those who sat on the ruling Revolutionary Command Council. Gamal Abdel-Nasser brought together a group of middle-class army officers of different political affiliations, from liberal, to Islamist to leftist, something which historian Mohamed Afifi, also the author of a book on the July Revolution, says also happened in the January Revolution in Tahrir Square. Egyptians from all political walks of life, as well as many independent figures, were brought together in January by their opposition to the regime. For Afifi, the middle-class element and the common political diversity are two features that link the revolutions of 23 July and 25 January. Both were prompted by an acute sense of frustration, he says, due to political deterioration and socio-economic injustice. Both were meant to replace a corrupt and failed regime, with many commentators arguing that the corruption was worse during the Mubarak years because it was a cross-the-board syndrome rather than just a matter for the ruling clique, as had been the case during the reign of King Farouk. The aims of both revolutions were also similar, each aiming for a just and democratic regime, and both the July and January revolutions were launched by members of the younger generations. "Nasser and his comrades were only in their early 30s back in 1952 -- not much older than many of those who led the road towards Tahrir Square and other squares around the nation during the 18 days of the January Revolution," Afifi comments. Equally, like the now almost 60-year-old July Revolution, the 25 January Revolution, now only six months old, has been followed by a phase of political uncertainty over the character of the new regime and its exact profile. "From 1952 until 1954, political confusion reigned," says Abdel-Meguid, adding that a phase of uncertainty "is only normal with revolutions that have no clear-cut ideological terms of reference." "If it had been an Islamist revolution or a Socialist revolution, then the situation would be clearer -- as compared to today, when the revolution took place in reaction to an already existing regime." Yet, unlike the 1952 Revolution, which occurred during a time of super-power struggle when the world was divided between continuing imperialism and attempts to gain independence, the January Revolution, notes one prominent political scientist and long-time critic of the Mubarak regime, occurred in a world where there is only a single super-power, the US, whose support for the Mubarak regime meant that it had no other patron to turn to. The same author adds that, contrary to the limited communications available in the 1950s, the revolutionary forces of 2011 had been able to count on Internet and other resources to design and implement their protests, though this is not to deny the January Revolution's spontaneous character, when apparently endless flows of individuals flooded into Tahrir Square in Cairo, Al-Qaid Square in Alexandria and Al-Arbein Square in Suez. "Unlike the wide public participation of the 25 January Revolution, in July 1952 people stayed at home and gave their silent consent to the movement of the army," says political analyst and commentator Wahid Abdel-Meguid. For Heba Raouf Ezzat, a political science professor with a clear Islamist affiliation, the raison d'être of the July Revolution was to end the corrupt monarchy and the prevalent social injustice, while the raison d'être of the 25 January Revolution was to establish a fully-fledged democracy that could bring about social justice, stability and equality in "a civil framework having nothing to do with the rule of the military and with a degree of Islamist terms of reference." According to Ezzat, the July Revolution opened the door to 60 years of veiled military rule, including the close to 30 years of the Mubarak presidency, while the 25 January Revolution aimed to replace this rule with a civilian one. "The objectives are essentially different," says politician and former parliamentarian Anwar Esmat El-Sadat. "In July 1952, Egypt was pursuing its independence from Britain and of having Egyptians decide the fate of their own country, but now we have a revolution that aims to launch the building of a democratic state," he adds. Also unlike the July Revolution, which had, according to El-Beshri, "a clear and uncontested leader in Nasser, despite the differences that occurred now and then," the 25 January Revolution remains leader-less. It has no clear structure, unlike the Revolutionary Command Council, and rather than achieving unity, the coalitions that started the demonstrations on 25 January are now falling into disintegration. "People say that the SCAF went straight to the Muslim Brotherhood and dealt with them as the representatives of the street, but this is not true. For the SCAF, the Muslim Brotherhood has a clear leader and a clear structure that indicates the influence and responsibility of each member of the top echelons," said a military source who asked to remain anonymous. When the head of the SCAF wishes to talk to the Muslim Brotherhood, it is clear whose number should be dialed, but when he wants to talk to the representatives of the revolution he needs to meet them in a room that fits some 100 people. THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD: Blurred lines of communication between the army and the Muslim Brotherhood marked the early months and years of the July Revolution. Pictures of the top members of the Revolutionary Command Council and the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood were easily promoted in the press, and the association of some of the leading names of the Free Officers Movement with the Islamist group that was founded as a charity in 1928, including that of Nasser himself during the 1930s, gave the impression of "a certain alliance between the army and the Brotherhood, though this was short-lived", as Afifi says. In 1956, following an attempt on his life during a speech in Mansheya Square in Alexandria that was attributed to the Muslim Brotherhood, Nasser decided to outlaw the group. Up until the end of the first week of the 25 January Revolution when Mubarak asked his short- lived vice-president, Omar Suleiman, to include the group among opposition forces invited to a national dialogue, the Brotherhood continued to carry the official title of an "outlawed organisation." "The Muslim Brotherhood supported the July Revolution, but the revolution's leaders turned against us. This time around, we took part and supported the 25 January Revolution, and we are hoping that what happened in the past will not happen again," says Hamdi Hassan, a member of the Brotherhood. According to Hassan, the future of the relationship depends on the positions taken by the SCAF, which he says is the effective caretaker of the revolution. "We are monitoring what the SCAF does. I am not saying we are concerned about what the SCAF is planning to do, but I am saying that we are keen to see the SCAF doing the right thing," he stated. THE ROLE OF THE MILITARY: "What is it that the army has in mind? We know they say they do not intend to stay in power, but will they really hand over the country to a civilian regime," asks one western ambassador in Cairo. Political commentators note that in 1952 the army started a movement that received public support, and El-Beshri argues that it was the failure of the divided political parties to act that led the army to do so in their stead. However, on 25 January it was the people who started the revolution and the army that supported it. As Abdel-Meguid pointedly states, the army led the Orabi Revolution in 1881 and the 1952 Revolution, even if it took a back seat in 1919. "The army was weak and mostly in Sudan in 1919, and it was therefore not closely associated with the 1919 Revolution. However, it clearly supported and protected the 25 January Revolution," he says. However, the question of whether the army has an interest in ruling, or whether it is concerned only to protect the nation, is as true today as it was in 1952. On the fourth day of the 25 January Revolution, the army took over from the police and asserted that it would protect the people, part of a clear message that it had no intention of trying to put down or repress the revolution. Communiqué Number One, issued by the SCAF on 10 February hours before Mubarak decided to delegate authority to the country's vice-president, also stressed the support of the army for the "legitimate demands of the Egyptian people." On 11 February, in Communiqué Number Three, after it was handed the responsibility to rule the country by Mubarak as he stepped down, the SCAF insisted that it had no intention "to replace the civil authorities," committing itself to a democratic transition. Today, many still believe that the army is committed to such a transition, even as some are suggesting otherwise. And while the first group quotes statements they attribute to the head of the SCAF, Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, suggesting that he is looking forward to retiring once a civilian president is elected, the second group speaks with scepticism about the undecided length of the transitional phase and the lack of a decision on a date for the presidential elections, not to mention the ambiguous communications between the SCAF and some of the not-so-popular presidential candidates. In 1952, much the same confusion reigned, though to a lesser degree because the Revolutionary Command Council did not talk about a civilian president or a democratic state. In fact, establishing a democratic state was not at the top of the list of the priorities of the July Revolution, though it is the number one priority of the 25 January Revolution. The struggle that followed between Mohamed Naguib, the first president of Egypt following the end of the monarchy, and Nasser over the need to reintroduce democracy, is also part of this history. "What happened then was lamentable because it allowed the Movement, or rather the coup d'état of 1952, to introduce a military dictatorship," says Khaled Abdel-Hamid, one of the faces of the 25 January Revolution. Unlike Abdel-Meguid, who argues that the 25 January Revolution should be seen as part of the march of the Egyptian nation towards freedom and democracy that started with the Orabi Revolution and passed through the phases of the 1919 Revolution and the July 1952 Revolution, Abdel-Hamid and Ezzat both insist that the 25 January Revolution replaced one form of political legitimacy with another one. Speaking to the Weekly this week from Tahrir Square, where some of the forces of the 25 January Revolution are still raising their political demands, both insist that Egypt's national day should now be changed. "It should be 25 January and not 23 July," say both Abdel-Hamid and Ezzat. Islam Lutfi, another participant in the 25 January Revolution and having a Muslim Brotherhood affiliation, is willing to acknowledge both dates, but he insists that "the fact of the matter is that the July Revolution failed to achieve its objectives, and now our revolution is working to make these objectives a reality." THE COPTS AND WOMEN: For Sadat and Afifi, however, the July Revolution did achieve some of its key objectives, especially during the Nasser years that ended with his death in September 1970. A certain level of social justice was secured after long years of disturbing socio-economic setbacks, development was launched with the construction of the Aswan High Dam, even if it was interrupted with the military defeat of 1967, and a sense of Pan-Arabism was initiated. "Under Nasser, all citizens were equal -- equal in terms of the gains they could get and in terms of the coercion to which they were subjected," argues Youssef Sidhom, a prominent Coptic figure. According to Sidhom, "the fact that the Copts say that their best years after the monarchy were under Nasser is due to the fact that Nasser was harsh with all the opposition, irrespective of its faith." Today, he is unbothered by the talk of the Salafis over the establishment of an Islamic state in Egypt. "Egypt will not turn into a fundamentalist state," he says. "We will not be like Iran, and I think that Coptic fears are exaggerated." In his view, "the army has made it clear in a recent statement that it will defend the civil values of the regime, and the Muslim Brotherhood is clearly saying that it does not intend to pursue a fundamentalist state. The concern of the Copts today should be the one of every Egyptian: to pursue democracy, because this is the only true protection against discrimination," he said. Fears of possible discrimination are also not strictly a Coptic concern. Women activists are also becoming increasingly concerned over the growing trend to undermine women's rights in the discourse of the post-25 January Revolution. Earlier this month, the New Woman Organisation and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network sent a joint letter to the prime minister demanding clear legislative commitments to protect the gains that have been achieved for women over the past few decades. While clearly underlining concerns at "a tendency to marginalise women in post-revolution Egypt," despite their participation in the making and success of the revolution, the letter notes that women were excluded from the committee selected by the SCAF to draft the constitutional amendments, another sign of the possible undermining of their role. According to Hashem, the support offered by the July 1952 Revolution to the rights of Copts and women was clear, though not immediate. It mostly came in 1956, after the stabilisation of the political debate, when the still-new regime started to woo women and the Copts. "I think it is only fair to wait before making a judgment on how the 25 January Revolution has metamorphosed in terms of handling the rights of women and Copts. It has only had a few months, after all," says Afifi. REVOLUTIONS CELEBRATED: During the January Revolution, it was the songs produced in the glory of the July Revolution that dominated Tahrir Square, among them songs by Abdel-Halim Hafez, Mohamed Abdel-Wahab, Shadiya and Umm Kolthoum, along with those by Sheikh Imam and Ahmed Fouad Nigm. These kept the momentum going, and after Mubarak stepped down, with the screams of joy it was to the music of these songs, produced to glorify Nasser, that the demonstrators started to sing and dance in a moment of celebration such as the Free Officers never saw. On the morning of 23 July this year, these very same songs will be broadcast by all the radio and TV channels to celebrate the anniversary of a revolution that replaced the monarchy with a republic, and another revolution that came 60 years later to replace a dictatorial republic with a democratic one, or so the demonstrators of 25 January hope.
