The intriguing X-factor that the Muslim Brotherhood represents in the country's not too distant political future is a growing subject of debate, finds Dina Ezzat Was last week's referendum over a constitutional amendment introducing multi-candidate presidential elections a signal of democracy at hand? Or was it yet another sign of its elusiveness? Those siding with the opposition said the nation still had a long and bumpy road to walk before it reached the democratic superhighway. Those sympathising with the government argued that despite the disturbing images of violence that stained the image of the referendum, 25 May 2005 still ushered in a fresh wind of change. The less predictable question, however, was what did the referendum mean to the fairly popular and unmistakably effective Islamist political groups, especially the well-organised but outlawed Muslim Brotherhood? To this question, again the answers varied. Overall, the press had much to offer this week on the Islamist groups, with strong emphasis on the Muslim Brotherhood. A Brotherhood group is arrested, another group is released; the Supreme Guide of the organisation is interviewed by Al-Wafd, the daily mouthpiece of the liberal Wafd Party; the following day Sawt Al-Umma, an independent weekly, runs an interview with a former but still sympathetic member of the Brotherhood. On Tuesday most papers had Muslim Brotherhood-related stories, news or analysis. The front page of the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm published a story on the appeal extended by Mohamed Akef, the Brotherhood's Supreme Guide, to President Mubarak to end the abuses that Akef said members of his organisation were subjected to. Also on their front pages, both the independent Nahdet Misr and Al-Ghad, the weekly mouthpiece of Al-Ghad Party, had news of the arrest of a former member of the group. And on its front page Al-Qahira, a weekly published by the Ministry of Culture, had the headline, "The honeymoon of the US and the Muslim Brotherhood comes to an end". On the same day, Al- Wafd, on its foreign affairs page, published comments by Akef on developments in Iraq. The opinion pages were just as focussed on the story of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as other Islamist groups. There seemed to be agreement among most commentators that the resurfacing of the Brotherhood during the past few weeks was all too real. Many commentators, for government and opposition, seemed convinced that the Brotherhood was set to aggressively involve itself in the on-going political drama. Some argued it was the right thing for the Brotherhood to do so, that it enjoyed widespread sympathy in many public quarters. According to these commentators, other countries in the region -- Turkey being the obvious example -- have been able to accommodate moderate Islamist groups, so why not Egypt and why not the Brotherhood? Other commentators suggested that for the Muslim Brotherhood to gain political legitimacy it needed to do more to cultivate its appeal among the less privileged -- as popular as it already might be. The Brotherhood, they argued, needed to adopt a "civil" -- as opposed to religious -- approach towards issues related to governance. And of course there were those who cautioned that the Brotherhood should not be trusted because their rule would be theocratic, and would consequently label any opposition as blasphemous. Throughout the week, it was mainly the independent papers that dedicated space to the potential role of the Muslim Brotherhood and other smaller but more militant groups like the long dormant Al-Takfir wal-Higra that made an appearance in the press this week with the news of the arrest of 23 of its members, and the Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya whose jailed leaders have also made a comeback. On Monday, Nahdet Misr dedicated two opinion pieces to the issue. Both articles alerted the reader that to allow the Brotherhood a bigger foothold in the political scene was a risk the nation should avoid. "The role of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has become an issue in [our country] after the debate on the amendment of [Article 76] of the constitution opened some files which have been dormant for a while. The Muslim Brotherhood has won the streets -- with some going from there to jail", wrote Abdel-Moneim Said, director of the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies. Said argued that all political groups should be given equal opportunities. However, he did not sound sure about what the Muslim Brotherhood would do if granted such an opportunity. Said said that if given the right to form a legitimate political party, the group will raise a religious banner and "rule by the Quran, not the constitution" every time it wants to argue a case or score political points. Said was far from alone in expressing concern that an Islamist party would in some way manipulate the Quran as a political tool. On the same page, Aliaa Rafei, a much less authoritative commentator than Said, argued the same point. Rafei stressed that neither she nor most of the Egyptian population, Muslims or Christians, would disagree with the role of religion in reforming society. But, she said, religion is one thing, politics is another. According to Rafei Egypt should not attempt to follow the Turkish example where an Islamist party was elected to government simply because Turkey is a secular state where political Islamist groups face serious consequences if they attempt to impose their religious views on the nation. After all, she argued, "if some Muslims are allowed to form political parties then the same should go for Copts" since Egypt is a country for both Muslims and Copts. The following day, the same paper dedicated considerable attention to the issue. "Once again... The issue is the Muslim Brotherhood, not the independents" was the headline of an article by Gamal Abdel-Gawad, a senior member of Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies and an associate of the ruling National Democratic Party. Abdel-Gawad argued that most of the criticism directed at the amended text of Article 76 of the constitution emanated from quarters sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood. According to Abdel-Gawad, critics suggested that the amended version imposes far too many restrictions on the right of independents to run for presidential office when in fact "there are not that many independents as such who could run for president. We are talking about special kinds of independents -- those affiliated to outlawed groups including the Muslim Brotherhood." The debate of whether the Muslim Brotherhood need to evolve into a civil political party was frequently broached in the press this week. Several commentators adopted the argument made by President Mubarak in the course of a rcent interview that Brotherhood members are free to join any political party as individuals or pursue any civil umbrella since the Egyptian constitution does not allow for the formation of religious-oriented parties. It was in this week's issue of Sawt Al-Umma that Farid Abdel-Khaliq, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, argued in an interview that the time had come for the organisation to embrace modernity and pursue a civil framework. According to Abdel-Khaliq, who subscribes to the growing voice of descent in the organisation, neither the name of the Muslim Brotherhood nor its Quran and two-sword emblem is sacred. Both could be changed, he told Sawt Al-Umma, if the Brotherhood had a true, legal and effective political platform. Brotherhood figures seemed more concerned with commenting on the aftermath of last week's referendum on Article 76. Doing so, many of them avoided harsh criticism of the government. Several adopted a moderate tone. The Muslim Brotherhood, its top members admitted, is not up to challenging the government. Indeed, this week, Sawt Al-Umma reported that the government allowed riot police buses to help transport thousands of Muslim Brotherhood members to central city sites of demonstrations protesting reports of the desecration of the Quran by US interrogators in Guantanamo. On Tuesday, Ibrahim El-Bahrawi, a regular commentator in Al-Masry Al- Youm, dedicated his column to reiterating his call upon the president to initiate a dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood. In his daily column in the financial daily Al-Alam Al-Youm, Mahmoud El- Tohami said Egyptians had a natural affinity to religion but that did not mean they will accept to be ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood. Meanwhile, papers continued to publish news of arrests of Muslim Brotherhood members for allegedly inciting violence and unrest. The papers also continued to report unconfirmed news of meetings between top members of the Muslim Brotherhood and US and European officials within the new Western framework that allows for dialogue between Washington and its European allies on the one hand and moderate Muslim political forces in Arab countries on the other.
