With the Muslim Brotherhood continuing to play a relatively high-profile role in recent anti-war protests, Jailan Halawi explores the somewhat peculiar relationship between the government and the banned -- but tolerated -- group While recent events have brought the complex relationship between the government and the Muslim Brotherhood into sharper focus, they have also opened up a Pandora's box of questions regarding the manner in which the state and the banned group interact. Tolerated at times and repressed at others, it is clear that in light of the current US-led invasion of Iraq, the Brotherhood seems to have somehow managed to find itself on the government's good side. In fact, the seemingly cozy relationship has even inspired questions -- and rumours -- of a secret deal between the government and the group. Government and brotherhood sources spoken to by Al-Ahram Weekly, however, denied that any such arrangement had been made. According to a high- ranking security official who spoke on customary condition of anonymity, the Interior Ministry "only deals with legitimate bodies". Quoting Interior Minister Habib El- Adli, the source said that while Egypt's democracy allows political parties to voice their opinions within the boundaries of the law, "defying legitimacy will not be tolerated." The source clarified this by saying that even though members of the banned group are usually present at demonstrations, as long as they do not go overboard or threaten national security, the police "deals with them the same way we deal with other citizens". The source also volunteered that security officials are just as frustrated by events in Iraq as the average citizen is, but that expressing these feelings should not "endanger" internal security. Abul-Ela Madi, a former member of the banned group, also denied the existence of any sort of "deal" between the Brotherhood and the state. Madi said he had heard that claim being made on BBC's Arabic service, but that his interpretation of current events was more along the lines of "the state realising how dangerous and difficult it would be to contain, or attempt to suppress, people's anger, thus inspiring the government to provide the public with more breathing space". It was last Friday's 15,000-strong anti- war march in Islamic Cairo that inspired much of the talk of an accommodation between the Brotherhood and the government. The march originated at Al- Azhar Mosque, with Islamists clearly representing a majority of the participants. But whereas previous demonstrations had been marked by violence and sometimes-vehement criticism of the state, this particular march featured none of the above, inspiring many political observers, and much of the foreign media, to interpret the unprecedented smoothness of the event as "a risky accommodation" between the regime and the banned group. Again, Madi rejected such allegations, explaining that while the Brotherhood was actively present at the demonstration, "they are not the only Muslims in Egypt. Egyptians are religious and the Brotherhood is part of this religious community," he said. The Muslim Brotherhood is the oldest Islamist group in the Arab world. In Egypt, despite the fact that it has been officially banned since 1954, analysts view it as the country's largest opposition bloc. Founded in 1928 by Hassan El-Banna, the Brotherhood's conflict with the state dates back to the early days of the 1952 Revolution, when, according to the government, the group began to use violence in pursuit of its political goals. The government also believes that most -- if not all -- of the militant Egyptian Islamist movements (including Al-Gama'a Al-Islamiya and Jihad) that launched a violent campaign in the 1990s to topple the regime, emerged from under the Brotherhood's cloak -- a charge that the Brotherhood has persistently denied. Last April, the Brotherhood organised large protests in support of the Palestinian Intifada in many parts of the country, the most prominent of which took place in Alexandria. The government's response, for the most part, was to crack down hard, both by dispersing the crowds and arresting many, of which Brotherhood members got the lion's share. Arrests are nothing new to the group. The Brotherhood has always been the target of systematic clampdowns on its most senior members -- a policy the banned group says is the government's way of "laying siege to, and suppressing, any signs of popular discontent". The fact, then, that Brotherhood members were not amongst the hundreds who were arrested after the first demonstrations against the war, helped raise many an eyebrow. Observers -- for the most part -- link this to the government's current focus on encouraging "national unity" in the broadest possible way in response to the US war on Iraq. Today, said Diaa Rashwan, a political analyst with Al-Ahram's Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, the concept of "national unity" is so crucial to the state that "a margin of freedom -- even for the Brotherhood -- " will do more good than harm. Rashwan traced the roots of the current state of government- Brotherhood relations to the September 2001 attacks on the United States. He said that although there is no agreement per se between the two sides, since 9/11 both the government and the Brotherhood "dwell in the same camp, united in fear". The reason, noted Rashwan, is that the US's global war on terrorism seems to have a fluid agenda regarding who and what should be targeted. On the one hand, the US sees itself as the sole arbiter of who poses a terrorist threat. On the other hand, it also allows itself the right to interfere in cases of human rights violations around the world. Practically speaking, Rashwan said, this means that if the government cracks down on Islamists, the US may cry out about "human rights violations". Meanwhile, if the government shows tolerance, the US may accuse Egypt of harbouring terror. Hence, explained Rashwan, the government currently finds itself confused regarding which direction "will comfort US paranoia". Officially speaking, at least, no matter how hard the Brotherhood tries to prove that it is a peaceful political party with a religious platform, security officials describe the group's activities as "a confirmation that their hidden agenda is to achieve political gains at the expense of the nation's well-being". Interior Minister El-Adli has accused the group of functioning in the "dark", plotting to use regional conflicts to "escalate tension, by inciting university students to demonstrate against the regime with illegitimate demands under the pretext of nationalism, only to serve their own interests." But with the region facing an uncertain future thanks to the US invasion of Iraq, it would seem that interests have somewhat converged. Essam El-Erian, a prominent Brotherhood figure who has been imprisoned as a result of his affiliation with the group, agreed with Rashwan about the current pressing need for unity amongst all Egyptians in the face of external threats. "No matter what our internal differences are," El-Erian said, "right now we are all aware of the dangers that threaten Egypt as well as the entire Arab region. The Iraqis have proven their ability to rise above their differences with their regime in order to bravely face the invaders. We don't need an invasion to understand that our strength is in unity." El-Erian, perhaps, came the closest to admitting that some sort of rearrangement -- even if it was unspoken -- had taken place. "Even if the Brotherhood have been used to quiet down the situation, as some reports claim," El- Erian said that would be "a positive" shift in the government's policy. "Perhaps the government is now convinced that the Brotherhood are not seeking personal or public gains and merely work for the benefit of the community." According to El-Erian, during wars, "missiles that fall on Arab countries do not differentiate between the opposition or the government, Muslims or Copts. We hope the state has seen the necessity of preparing people for a long confrontation with an external foreign aggressor whose aim is to dominate its land, resources, religion as well as culture. That is our utmost goal." In a similar vein, the government and the Brotherhood were also in agreement quite recently regarding the US's threat to cut off any additional aid to Egypt because of the conviction of sociologist Saadeddin Ibrahim, who has since been acquitted. At the time, the Brotherhood released a statement declaring their objection to the "flagrant" interference in Egypt's domestic affairs that the US aid cut-off threat represented. The anti-war rally that took place at Cairo Stadium a few weeks before the war began also found the two sides in complete harmony. Although reportedly sponsored by a national coalition of Egypt's opposition parties, syndicates and civil society organisations, members of the banned group visibly dominated the protest. It was also no secret that the government-sanctioned rally was the brainchild of the brotherhood's supreme guide, Ma'moun El-Hodeiby. According to Rashwan, the state is acutely aware of both the Brotherhood's popularity, as well as its ability to mobilise the masses. Today, said Rashwan, it is essential that the state prove that -- even though there may be long-running disputes between itself and the banned group -- the entire nation backs the government's foreign policy. However, said Rashwan, despite the Brotherhood's "semi-official existence", it seems "impossible" that the government would one day soon legitimise the group completely.
