The impact of the deadly Israeli raid on the Freedom Flotilla is still being assessed. Doaa El-Bey and Rasha Saad review what the analysts had to say Abdallah Hassan wrote that the ferocious attack on the Freedom Flotilla was not the first of its kind, nor would it be the last. Israel is used to adopting a policy of defiance and attacking innocent civilians without answering to the international community or Arab public opinion. While he hailed the Egyptian decision to indefinitely open the Rafah crossing to ease the suffering of Gazans, Hassan pointed to other parties that could be less effective, like the decision by Nicaragua, Venezuela and Bolivia to cut diplomatic relations with Israel. He was not impressed by the foreign ministers' meeting at the Arab League headquarters in protest at the Israeli aggression. After the meeting, they threatened to withdraw the Arab peace initiative which was presented by Saudi Arabia at the 2002 summit, wondering what could withdrawing an initiative that did not achieve anything for eight years do. "Slogans, demonstrations and statements are not enough to confront the Israeli defiance. We are in need of serious stands that confirm Palestinian as well as Arab unity. Then, we can stop the Israeli defiance forever and take the peace track if it is still available," Hassan wrote in the official weekly Akhbar Al-Yom. The editorial of the official daily Al-Gomhuriya said the US administration was trying through diplomacy and pressure to rescue the racist extremist criminals whose brutal aggression on the Turkish flotilla in the Mediterranean caused international anger against Israel. The administration volunteered to justify the Israeli crime as Israel's absolute right to defend its security, as US Vice-President Joe Biden put it. He also said that the flotilla was carrying rockets to be used against Israel rather than food, medicine and children's toys. The edit pointed to the fact that the US administration is still repeating the same ridiculous excuse -- that of self defence -- as if it is addressing a bunch of idiots, not the families of people who at the hands of Israel, the strategic ally of the US, have been involved in massacres, assassinations and destruction through successive generations. "The US administration never gets bored of repeating the same excuse for Israel, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama," the edit summed up. Ibrahim Nafei hailed the Egyptian stand which immediately condemned the Israeli attack on the flotilla, as well as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which summoned the Israeli ambassador to officially convey Egypt's objections. Meanwhile, President Hosni Mubarak opened the Rafah crossing for an indefinite time to allow Gazans to move to and from the Strip. Nafei asked why a Hamas spokesman called the Egyptian move not enough. Hamas was complaining about the crossing being closed and now it has been opened indefinitely by a presidential decree, so what exactly does Hamas want? He asked in the official daily Al-Ahram. At the same time, Nafei added, Hamas rejected a call by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to meet a delegation from the Executive Committee of the PLO in order to agree on achieving national reconciliation by signing an Egyptian document. "That was a great opportunity to achieve reconciliation, invest in the international anger against Israel, form a government of national unity that includes Hamas, have the blockade lifted completely, and prepare for the negotiation with Israel from a strong position," he wrote. However, Hamas declined the offer and worked on investing the international outrage against Israel to achieve some direct gains and to open the Rafah crossing, which was a short-sighted view, Nafei concluded. Many writers expressed dissatisfaction with the outcome of the Shura Council elections. Nabil Rashwan wrote that the 15th elections of the Shura Council ended without any surprises except the victory of four opposition candidates. And indeed, it was a surprise, he added, because during the last 30 years, only two opposition members managed to win the poll. Writers also drew comparisons between the elections within the opposition Wafd Party and that of the Shura Council. Osama Heikal described the two elections as contradictory. The first battle was fierce and honourable by all means. Although it took a short time, it drew the attention of the entire Egyptian public and for the first time in Egypt debates were held between the rivals. It was also difficult to predict who the winner was, which was another reason for the anticipation of the Egyptian street. As for the Shura elections, he continued, it brought us quickly back to reality. The turnout did not exceed 30 per cent, and there were many violations reported by newspapers, satellite channels and civil society organisations. "It is not true that Egyptians are not mature enough to establish a genuine and complete democratic process. The members of the Wafd Party are Egyptians and they held an election that gained the respect of all Egyptians not only party members. Likewise, members of the various syndicates and clubs managed to choose their chairmen and boards in fair elections. Why then do Egyptians participate in such elections and abstain from participating in general political elections in which the National Democratic Party participates, supervises and sets the rules?" Heikal asked in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Yom. Mustafa Shafiq expressed despair that the ruling NDP would learn anything from the Wafd elections. The NDP practised all forms of violations, rigging and pressure in the Shura elections. "When a fair observer looks at the results of the elections, he will remember Saad Zaghloul's famous saying, 'There is no hope'" Shafiq wrote in the daily Al-Wafd, the mouthpiece of the opposition Wafd Party. Shafiq asked whether it was possible for an NDP candidate to receive 170,000 votes while his rival collected just a single vote. Shafiq wondered what the party wants to do to the Egyptian citizen and how a party that froze the election process in the syndicates of engineers, pharmacists, doctors and teachers could claim that it ran fair elections. He called on the other parties and national powers to reassess their participation in the political field and their interaction with the issues that concerned citizens.
