Why do Western and Egyptian media disagree so much with each other on the issue of how Egypt is dealing with protests against the current military-backed interim government and with Islamic extremism, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood? When you come right down to it, western media and governments aren't any more enamored with the Muslim Brotherhood than the Egyptian government is. The disagreement, however, comes over the question of how to deal with the organization in the aftermath of the events of June/July of 2013. Western media, especially recently, are filled with stories of "barbaric torture" which they allege the Egyptian government is carrying out against members of the Brotherhood, secular opponents, and even individuals described as "completely innocent". The BBC reported in late March that arrested Brotherhood members and others (including teenagers) are being subjected to "brutal beatings, sexual abuse, and electric shocks". Buzzfeed, a popular Internet news and entertainment site, recently carried an extremely dismissive article about Egyptian media entitled, 'Six Hallucinatory Egyptian Newspaper Headlines Attacking the Western Press'. But even more damaging was the report issued this week by Michele Dunne and Scott Williamson of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: 'Egypt Unprecedented Instability by the Numbers'. The article argued that Egypt is far more "violent and unstable than it has been in decades". "Despite Egyptian officials' statements that the measures they are taking are necessary to stabilize the country, the opposite is true," the report said. "Egypt is a far more violent and unstable place than it was before July 2013 or indeed has been for decades, as government repression drives an expanding cycle of political violence. And there has been no indication yet that conditions will quiet down anytime soon." But reading the Egyptian media is like watching the world from the other side of the looking glass. When 529 people were recently sentenced to death for their involvement in the killing of a police officer in August, 2013 in Minya, it was an event openly celebrated by many journalists in Egypt. Ahmad Moussa, who hosts 'Ala Masou'ouleyati' (On my Responsibility) at the privately owned Sada al-Balad channel, opened his show with a salute to the Egyptian judiciary. "I salute the fairness and justice of our judiciary in defiance of those killers, and all those who attack it. Egypt's judiciary is clean and fair," he said. Meanwhile, Rania Badawy, of 'Fel Midan' (In The Square) on Tahrir channel, opened her program after the court's decision by saying, "Today, we got justice, the justice that we want. We are tired of your violence. We will build the country despite your war." And in a strong rebuke to the Egyptian foreign ministry, she added, "Egyptian diplomacy is too diplomatic in my opinion," she said. She advised the ministry to take a stronger position against the U.S. : "Respond in a stronger way; choose your words; be cruel; take a position," she said. Meanwhile, Western media, in particular the BBC, the Guardian and the Washington Post, have been accused by some Egyptian newspapers of being financed by the Muslim Brotherhood. "The suspicious relationship between the terrorist organization (the Muslim Brotherhood) and the Western media: 3 billion U.S. dollars to ruin the image of the Egyptian revolution," as one paper wrote. So how is it that U.S. and Egyptian media can look at the same events and see them in such completely different ways? When Mohammed Morsi was elected president of Egypt in June of 2012, the U.S. government held its nose and decided that in the interest of democracy it would work with the new government. After all, Egyptians had voted and elected Morsi. It was the will of the people. But America's relationship with the Morsi government was never a comfortable one. After the attacks on the American embassy in Cairo in September of 2012, President Obama went so far as to hint that Egypt wasn't really an ally of the U.S. But when Morsi was overthrown, it looked like a coup, especially to the American media. They pressured the U.S. government to respond, which led to the decision to cut back on some military aid. It didn't have anything to do with support for the Brotherhood, but more with the notion of how democracy is seen in the west. You do not overthrow a democratically elected government, regardless of how bad it may be. Instead, you vote it out when that opportunity comes. And for much of the Western media, it was obvious that the real culprit behind the 'coup' was the Egyptian military, and that it had been planning this for a while. But Egyptians looked at the situation completely different. While it is true that Morsi was legitimately elected, his increasing attempts to create a government totally dominated by the extremist Brotherhood and its religious outlook, to the detriment of the collapsing Egyptian economy, could not be tolerated any longer by a majority of Egyptians. When millions of them took to the streets to denounce Morsi on June 30th, 2013, it was perfectly logical that the military acted in the way that it did. They were only making the will of the people concrete. As an Egyptian friend said to me recently, "The Brotherhood had to go. They were destroying Egypt. That's why El-Sisi is seen as a hero. He literally saved the country in the eyes of most Egyptians." And as terrorism in Egypt grows, Egyptians see the court's response as a blow against extremism and the Brotherhood, who they now see as connected to al-Qaeda. It is not "barbaric torture" but justice for the over 280 Egyptians who have been killed in terrorist attacks since July 2013. Unfortunately, the upcoming presidential election, which will surely lead to the election of General El-Sisi as president, will only widen the misunderstanding. Western media will no doubt paint it as the culmination of the military's plan to deal the coup de grace to the dreams of the Arab spring, and return the government to its Mubarak-era totalitarianism. But Egyptians will see the election of El-Sisi as the defeat of the kind of Islamic extremism championed by the Brotherhood, a rebuke to the jihadists engaged in terrorism against the people, and a chance to return the country to a stability that has been absent since January 25th, 2011. It is likely that the two sides will continue to misunderstand each other for years to come.
