Close up: Facing the facts By Salama A Salama In all democratic countries, everyone from across the political spectrum is given a chance. Socialists and racists, leftists and religious extremists; all have a role to play. Even World War II didn't lead to a total repression of Nazism and fascism. The only condition is that everyone has to respect the law and abide by the constitution. More important, all citizens are treated as equals, regardless of their race, colour or creed. In Egypt, things are done differently. Here, we start out by classifying political parties and currents, then we criminalise those we don't like, then we make exceptions. Thereafter we sell indulgences. Then we go out of our way to convince the public that the freedom we're left with is enough for a credible rotation of power. Cutting and pasting, barring and excluding, this is the way some people want our political life to be. The same people who have run the country for over half a century are telling us what's best for us. And they are not about to acknowledge our real problems. For example, the fact that we don't have free and fair elections, that almost two-thirds of the nation don't vote, that one party is in charge, and that the law is applied selectively. One searches for something new in the constitutional amendments as if searching for a needle in a haystack. I found one thing that may be new; namely, the statement that all citizens are equal without exception and that the state is of a secular nature. As for the ban on religious parties, I am less sure. Banning religious parties is not such a bad idea, but only if the aim is to protect public freedoms and rights. It was disturbing to see the president denounce a certain current in no ambiguous terms even before the constitutional amendments were finalised. The Muslim Brotherhood, we were told, poses a threat to the security of Egypt, and would isolate Egypt, scare foreign capital, and devastate the job market if it were ever allowed to take power. I fail to see how the Muslim Brotherhood can be the main threat to the nation. We certainly have other, more serious, problems. One is that we suffer from political-tunnel vision. Another is that so far we haven't found a political alternative to religious parties. Banning a political current and putting its supporters in prison is not the answer. Hoping that the Brotherhood would, by some miracle, use its political edge is not the answer. We're wasting our time. Instead of forcing the Muslim Brotherhood to respect the rules of the political game, we're harassing it. Instead of getting the Brotherhood to act as a legitimate political party, we're banning it. What we're doing can only start a vicious circle of violence in the country. European democracies made up their mind a long time ago. They allow all rightwing parties to operate within the law, and at the same time they criminalise any behaviour that smacks of racism. In European democracies, secular parties and civil society have a wide range of freedom, which they use to get the public on their side and away from religious parties. Look at what Spain is doing. Following years of strife, the government of Zapatero is trying to involve ETA in the political process. The Spanish government is encouraging the separatists of yesterday to become the political partners of tomorrow. This is what responsible governments do. Our ruling party is entitled to fear the Muslim Brotherhood. It is entitled to resent its popularity. But fear mustn't become national policy, and resentment mustn't undermine constitution al reforms.
