Hypocrites are lining up to embrace the Egyptian revolution; especially those who propped up or who were part of the old order, writes Amr El-Bayoumi It is essential to see, not to mirror; the latter is an indulgence -- Henrik Ibsen During the 20 days between the landing of Napoleon in the south of France and his entry into Paris to reclaim his dominion in 1812, the corresponding press headlines covering his journey provide a noteworthy example of the malleability, if not a clear shameless opportunism, of certain political viewpoints as historic events unfold in an unpredictable manner. The public portrayal of Napoleon was transformed entirely as his northward conquests progressed: "The monster has escaped from his place of exile�ê� The Corsican werewolf has landed at Cannes�ê� The tiger appeared at Gap. The wretched adventurer ended his career in the mountains�ê� The fiend has actually, thanks to treachery, been able to get as far as Grenoble�ê� The tyrant has reached Lyons... The usurper has dared to advance within 150 miles of the capitol�ê� Bonaparte moves northward with rapid strides, but he will never reach Paris �ê� Tomorrow Napoleon will be at our gates �ê� His Majesty is at Fontainebleu." Not surprisingly, the reverse transformation from dedicated supporter to vehement critic can occur in an equally comprehensive manner. This convenient and cowardly metamorphosis of firmly held "beliefs" has existed before Napoleon's day and will continue to be replicated an uncountable number of times. Turning to Egypt over the past four months, the utter lack of credibility in the US administration's revamped rhetoric is all too obvious after the so-called "Arab Awakening", a repulsively paternalistic misnomer in and of itself. (No, the Arabs were not roused out of a deep slumber by half-baked tweets and superficial wall postings, they were, and remain, engaged in struggling to survive under oppressive regimes that were fully supported, if not dictated to, by the US government so long as those regimes continued to execute US regional policy). US Vice President Joseph Biden provided us with a textbook example of the spontaneous epiphanies that normally infect those who were extensively and unequivocally associated with a fallen dictator. On 27 January he stated: "Mubarak has been an ally of ours in a number of things. And he's been very responsible on, relative to geopolitical interest in the region, the Middle East peace efforts; the actions Egypt has taken relative to normalising relations with�ê� Israel�ê� I would not refer to him as a dictator." This statement is a clear affirmation of the fact that the US administration has and will continue to value the regional interests of the ruling elite above all other considerations, including human rights and genuine democracy, notwithstanding the charming lip service paid to both. Five days less than the period it took the French press to convert Napoleon from a "monster" into "His Majesty", Biden stated that the resignation of Mubarak "is a pivotal moment in history" and that it is America's hope that Egypt and the region would chart "a path towards democracy". Back in late January when the Obama administration was clinging on to hopes of their loyal servant Mubarak weathering the popular storm of open discontent throughout Egypt (led not only by youth in Tahrir Square, but hundreds of thousands of determined Egyptian peasants, workers, women, Copts and senior citizens from Alexandria to Mahalla to Suez to Assiut to Sohag), Vice President Biden should have shown more respect for the intelligence of both the Egyptian and American people in having the audacity of referring to the Mubarak regime as anything but a shameless dictatorship that thoroughly corroded the fibre of Egyptian society down to the molecular level. Perhaps a more respectable (or at least more honest) response would have been "He's an SOB, but he's our SOB," as was stated by President Franklin D Roosevelt's secretary of state, Cordell Hull, in reference to Trujillo, the brutal dictator of the Dominican Republic. But, alas, economic self-interest and opportunism continue to deny the US administration any real credibility with most of the Egyptian people, and unabashed efforts to co-opt their revolutionary spirit will continue with the willing assistance of neo-liberal "locals". We can also rely on the Muslim Brotherhood to persevere as a talented contestant in the opportunistic dance. The Brotherhood has a decades-long track record of being complicit in legitimising those in power by playing the role of an extremist alternative that has been willingly and tactically manipulated by the powers that be like a faucet of fear mongering, notwithstanding the thousands of its members that were subject to imprisonment and torture. I recall participating in a demonstration in Tahrir in early February where some Brotherhood members chanted the slogan "No Negotiation Before Resignation!" even though representatives of the Brotherhood were meeting with then vice president Omar Suleiman that same day in hopes of cutting a convenient power redistribution deal. The subsequent resignation of Suleiman has not slowed the Brotherhood's continued efforts to push for quick fix elections (the constitutional referendum in March) regardless of the detriment to Egyptian society as a whole that will result. Perhaps the lack of credibility of the Brotherhood is becoming more pronounced. Hence, the establishment of the Salafis as a new "boogie man" to keep us all in check. Just when you thought it was safe to venture back into civil society, hardcore, kalwar kamees clad so-called fringe groups are trying to take over Egypt and turn it into a mega mullah state that will make 1980s Iran look like ninth Century Cordoba. Will we also see further evidence of chameleon-like dissociation from those Egyptians with an unabashed history of intimate ties with Israel at the highest levels? The direct impact of the Camp David "peace" accords and resultant neutering of Egyptian economic autonomy that has destructively pervaded our nation for decades is becoming more and more apparent and the corresponding identification of Egyptians with the suffering of the Palestinian people is becoming more pronounced. As such, we are likely to observe acute cases of amnesia in the minds of those who chose to "pragmatically" embrace political and economic cooperation with Israel in total disregard of the ongoing violations of international law by Israel, which were duly supported and ignored by the Mubarak regime. It is not sufficient to merely highlight the recent wave of blatant contradictions of several key players inside and outside of Egypt. Many say that now is not the time for divisiveness and "witch hunts". I certainly believe that the challenges that face us in the coming decades in rebuilding a respectable civil society requires us to focus more on the future rather than the past. The context of this rebuilding process should be established on the basis of transparency, disclosure and oversight by an inclusive geographical base of independent committees of legal scholars, academics, intellectuals, labour and rural representatives, student unions and community representatives. For example, all acts of theft of state assets and murder and torture of innocent civilians must be prosecuted by an independent council of judicial authorities and citizens in the same manner as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of post-Apartheid South Africa, which addressed the past in order to conclude it and move forward with the process of rebuilding. As part of this process, we must ensure the true independence of the participants by "reading the label" and collectively scrutinising the consistency of participants' interests, affiliations and viewpoints over time, while not being fooled by sugar coated terms such as "pragmatism", "versatility" and "Realpolitik", which seek to mask shameless opportunism. No meaningful elections can take place in Egypt before these independent civic groups can establish transparent regulations whereby any candidate or political party seeking to participate in the process must fully disclose their funding sources and commercial and political affiliations, and be subject to serious civil and criminal penalties for failing to do so. These same civic groups must also play a primary role in establishing anti-corruption and conflict of interest regulations to be applied to all elected and appointed public officials. The grassroots spirit of the Egyptian people that I witnessed in Tahrir Square that allowed spontaneous organisation of security, medical care, food supplies and communication there confirmed my firm belief that the determination and human resources of Egypt are abundant within a proper framework, and will not require the "assistance" of any non-Egyptian associations or think tanks that do not have the best interests of the Egyptian people as their sole objective. What we have experienced over the past four months in Egypt was revolutionary, but it was not a revolution. It was a glimpse at the possibility of a true revolution -- a seed despite every effort being made to restore the ominous clouds of suppression by pouring old wine into new bottles, calling for the restoration of "stability", fostering fear of poverty and anarchy (notwithstanding the fact that instability and chaos have been present in Egypt for decades) and US and European administration efforts to "manage" the revolution so as to avoid its "radicalisation" by making the interim period as short as possible and ensuring the commitment to Camp David principles, which have materially compromised Egypt's political sovereignty and economic self-sufficiency. Millions have witnessed this possibility of true revolution, and a genuine understanding of the interests that are contrary to achieving it is a critical step in restoring the dignity of the Egyptian people. * The writer is an attorney-at-law in London.
