Egypt's political powers, mainly Islamists and liberals, would do better if they looked in depth at and drew conclusions from the gory clashes that hit the iconic Tahrir Square on Friday. The violence, the worst since Islamist President Mohamed Morsi took office in late June, came against a backdrop of political polarisation, reflected in sharp disagreements over the make-up of a commission tasked with drafting the new Constitution. Liberals say the Constituent Assembly, formed by the now-disbanded Parliament, is dominated by Islamists and as such the final product will be an "unbalanced" constitution, reflecting the view of the dominant Islamists. Meanwhile, Islamists, led by Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, deny they are calling the shots for the Constitution panel, accusing liberals of ‘ideological twisting' and bias. The gulf keeps widening between the two sides, as the Tahrir showdown ominously showed. Leaders in both camps, whether intentionally or not, are fuelling this rift ahead of next year's parliamentary elections. A compromise seems far from attainable amid escalating political and street tensions. Some weeks ago, liberal and leftist forces said they would hold a mass protest in Tahrir, the focal point of the anti-Mubarak uprising, against what they see as Morsi's failure to fulfil in his first 100 days in office the promises he made during his campaign for the presidency to improve the economy and security. Two days before the scheduled rally, a criminal court cleared all 24 defendants, including senior officials from the Mubarak regime, of orchestrating a deadly crackdown on protesters over 18 months ago, in what local media dubbed the ‘Battle of the Camel'. The ruling was the latest acquittal in a series of trials on protester deaths. The Muslim Brotherhood said their followers would congregate in Tahrir to denounce the acquittals and press for retrials. For the governing Brotherhood, the issue was crucial and urgent enough to supersede any other agenda. The Brotherhood followers and liberals turned up on Friday at the same time and in the same place, but with two divergent agendas. Their political differences spilled over into pitched battles. Despite the conflicting accounts given by the two belligerent sides of the Tahrir face-off, the Brotherhood activists were apparently at pains not to allow their opponents to criticise them or their fellow MB member, Morsi, who is now the head of state. If so, more than one irony was at play. The 84-year-old Muslim Brotherhood was long the victim of oppression at the hands of those in power. Now in power, should the Brotherhood also oppress dissenters? The place – or rather the battleground – presents another irony. Since the anti-Mubarak uprising started on January 25, 2011, Tahrir has proved to be a melting pot for all Egyptians. There, Muslims coherently mingled with Christians; leftist with Islamists; and the military with civilians. The site lived up to its name – Tahrir or ‘Liberation'. The square continued to serve as a pro-democracy venue under the military generals who took over after Mubarak. The Muslim Brotherhood's apparent bid to stop Morsi's critics from bringing him to account, on what the opposition called the ‘Friday of Accountability', ran counter to the essence of the revolt against Mubarak. A key aim of the uprising was to end autocracy and establish genuine democracy. Since reversing their pledge not to field a candidate for the presidency earlier this year, the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's best organised political group, have raised misgivings about their agenda, drawing accusations of seeking to monopolise power. While attempting on Friday to stop what they called ‘slurs' by liberal protesters against the group and Morsi, the Brotherhood followers have obviously failed to grasp the enormous changes, which have unfolded in Egypt in the past couple of years or so. One key change is that the Brotherhood leaders themselves have walked free from jail and risen to power. Another fact is that, although still a Brotherhood member, Morsi is now Egypt's President, a status that does not grant him immunity to criticism, but makes him an all-inclusive leader. The Brotherhood lost out to their opponents in Tahrir on Friday, but Egypt's loss is bigger. The Tahrir clashes glaringly showed that differences among political powers have become sharp enough to cause blood to be unjustifiably shed on the streets.
