Benny Avni has written an article in the New York Post that is very objective and positive towards the real situation in Egypt and its leader President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. http://nypost.com/2015/02/10/losing-egypt-putin-exploits-obamas-slaps-at-us-ally/ The article highlighted the fact that terrorism actually has one single origin which is the Brotherhood in Egypt. This is a reality that the Brotherhood is working hard to cover up by having its subgroups adopt terrifying new names and aliases to dilute the impact of its own name, and negate their origin. In the 8th paragraph the article says: "Simple: America no longer wants the friendship of a man who, according to his detractors, has reversed Egypt's progress toward democracy." I would like to examine this statement. I fully understand that the article may not be adopting that idea at all, yet I find discussing it useful for those who may be in doubt. The article says that America's actions are in line with the attitude voiced by Al Sisi's critics who think that the President has reversed the country's progress toward democracy. The question we need to discuss here is: "How did he reverse democratic progress?" One: Before winning a majority election victory and becoming President, Al Sisi got a much more awesome, democratic display of support from the millions who came out into the streets all over Egypt. This unprecedented, public, democratic show was an extreme vote of confidence that the Egyptian public wanted to bestow. If that is an action that reverses democracy, then what is the action that could accelerate it? Two: Al Sisi had a plan laid out for an itemized road map. That road map has been meticulously followed from the outset and only one step remains, to register a 100% score on time achievement. This is the very embodiment of democracy. Three: Ever since 2011, the Egyptian people have adopted the method of expressing what they need to say in the most well-known and basic, democratic way. They are now in the habit of taking to the streets in massive turnouts, to express rejection and even support. So if there is anything that Egyptians reject or disapprove of now, nothing would prevent them from taking to the streets, in their millions, to express that rejection. This is what they have been doing for the past four years. Kindly note: We are talking about Egypt and Egyptians here. Democracy is respecting the opinion of the people and providing the right channels for the public to express themselves. In a country where the parliament is still a project in progress, the streets are a good substitute. Egyptians have been using them well. At times when the situation in the country became extremely threatening, the public overwhelmingly and democratically demanded the ousting of the regime. Situations that called for street action were urgent, as far as the public could see. For example the Brotherhood regime gave Egyptian land in the South to Sudan and to the Northeast to Hamas. This same regime allowed a blockade of the Supreme Court and Media City without a single move to stop it. This Brotherhood regime allowed their factions to attack peaceful demonstrators at the Presidential Palace without making any attempt to stop them. To top it all, came the Presidential pardon accorded to Brotherhood criminals by their president, and their premature release from prison. There was no time for any voting. If a knife were being held at your son's throat, you would kick the offender in the face, without waiting. You would not wait for the due process of the law to save your son's life. Egyptians have followed what was democratically available and suitable for the situations they faced. Please take a look at the images of 30 June and 3 July 2013; what you will see will be a democratic display of such power that no ballot could possibly express it. The Egyptian President has not reversed democracy in Egypt; he has made sure to accelerate it at full throttle.
