The lengthy silence on the disappearance of journalist Rida Hilal was finally broken while the new government was caught in the vice of double-pronged criticism, writes Aziza Sami On Wednesday, the national daily Al-Ahram 's columnist Salah Montasser, who usually steers clear of tackling domestic political issues, wrote a column entitled "Where is Rida Hilal?" The writer, who often devotes his column to non-controversial anti-smoking campaigns or publishing letters from readers, presented the theory that Hilal's disappearance one year ago this month might be because of his having written extensively on the issue of "Christian Zionism". Montasser appeared to suggest that Hilal was perhaps liquidated by agents of this trend. "Hilal published eight books about America," writes Montasser, "by far the most significant of which was The Jewish Christ and the End of the World: Political Christianity and Fundamentalism in America. When I heard of the disappearance of Hilal in still mysterious circumstances, indicating that it was most artfully concocted, all I could recall was this book. I remembered how it revealed the extent to which Christian Zionism is the foundation upon which America's bias towards Israel is built, not only amongst politicians but also ordinary Americans." Montasser devoted his article the following day to reviewing some of Hilal's writings. He did not, however, explain why other Egyptian and Arab writers -- and there are many who preceded Hilal in tackling Christian Zionism -- did not likewise "disappear". Giving his view on the case of Engineering Consultant Mamdouh Hamza whom British authorities released without bail pending his trial in September, the Editor-in-Chief of Al-Akhbar Galal Dowidar wrote on Monday that "events show that when the state, embodied in its leadership, meets with the popular will, the result is always in the national interest. The response of President Mubarak was strong. This was reflected in quick action by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry. Public opinion was angry and disbelieving, after Al-Akhbar led the campaign to reveal what happened to Hamza. Under these circumstances, there was no recourse for the British judiciary except, in line with the law, to scrutinise the evidence at hand and decree Hamza's release." On Wednesday the opposition weekly newspaper Al-Ahali issued by the left-wing Al-Tagammu Party, in its banner forebodingly warned Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif against any "reduction in subsidies". The banner was actually the headline of an article by head of the party Rifaat El-Said who wrote, "information has leaked, perhaps deliberately, of ministerial discussions on the cancellation of subsidies. It is also reported that it has been agreed to do away with a portion of subsidies possibly reaching 25 per cent, as a first step towards the final cancellation of all subsidies under the usual absurd pretext of allowing subsidies to reach those who deserve them." El-Said's article gave voice to the prevalent view, especially among the political left, although not strictly so, since other opposition papers reflected a similar theme, that the new "business-oriented" government will be working against the interests of the common man. El- Said wrote in conclusion, "I warn you, although I do not mean to frighten you, that subsidies are not charity. They are what will protect the system against the fire that could engulf everything. Do not think the Egyptian people are subdued or afraid. They have always surprised observers when it was thought least possible. Remember the revolution of 1919 and the uprising of 1946 (against the British occupation). Remember the anger of workers in 1975 and bread riots of 1977 (when former President Anwar El-Sadat cancelled bread subsidies)." On Friday the opposition daily Al-Wafd issued by the Wafd Party demanded in its banner, "Where is Nazif's government?" This was the headline of a front-page story alleging that the government has "ignored rising prices and unemployment, devoting its energies to providing electronic subsidy cards. All the president's decrees have been postponed until (government members) return from the North Coast!" Press coverage also suggested that the new government will be facing a challenge in its attempt to break the monopoly of vested economic interests. The daily Al-Ahrar on Wednesday as well came out with a banner reporting "a new crisis in construction steel". The newspaper reported that "the steel market has witnessed a new crisis in the wake of new decrees (by Minister of Industry Rashid Mohamed Rashid) abolishing anti-dumping fines on steel imports from Turkey and the Ukraine. In order to raise prices, the steel barons reduced supply to a level far short of that demanded by contractors. This resulted in a sudden rise in the price of steel which reached LE325 per tonne, contrary to all expectations that prices would be reduced after the new decrees." According to Al-Ahrar "the steel barons, led by Ahmed Ezz, the head of the Budget and Planning Committee of parliament, have announced their defiance of the new government, after Rashid issued the new decrees. Sources warn of the attempts of the steel barons to maneuver around these decrees, especially in view of expectations of new reductions in steel prices after ongoing deals with the old prices have been completed." The front page Al-Ahrar reported, tongue in cheek, a statement by Nazif given to the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyasa that Egypt's "political liberalisation is the reason for its current economic ailment." According to Al-Ahrar, Nazif in an interview with Al- Siyasa 's Editor-in-Chief Ahmed Al-Garallah had expressed "optimism and confidence" concerning the implementation of his government's programmes. According to Al-Ahrar, Nazif also told Al-Garallah that "the current economic ailment suffered by Egypt is because of the broad political freedom which has given an opportunity to whomsoever pleases to imagine problems, exaggerate them, and publish them in a manner far exceeding their true dimension." Al-Garallah, whose revelation that "freedom in Egypt is in excess" was quoted by the national daily Al-Akhbar last week, provoked a response this week from columnist Salah Issa. Writing in Al-Wafd on Saturday, Issa wrote on "the pickling of minds". The writer was scathingly critical of Al-Akhbar for having published "verbatim and with such fanfare the article (alleging that all who seek quick reform in Egypt are members of a political circus connected to outside forces). If Al-Garallah was concerned about reaching the truth, he would have at least listened to the response of Egypt's reformists to such allegations, as well as to members of the Egyptian government who do not stop repeating that the NDP's upcoming congress in September will announce the party's programme of political reform. Why did Al- Akhbar emphasise Al-Garallah's analysis? Was it happy that his accusations were directed to all of Egypt's reformists, and so was keen to repeat them? Or was it concerned to reveal a trend which is conspiring to disband this political circus which demands democracy and constitutional reform? Did Al- Akhbar want to herald to us that we possess freedom in excess? Did it want, therefore, to export our excess freedom to brotherly Kuwait, and so rectify its balance of payments and resolve its economic problems? Al-Akhbar, in all probability, considered none of these things. It simply delved in its basement and picked up a file entitled 'analyses in support of despotism'. And so reformists, wield your pens and sharpen your tongues!"
