Democracy is the solution.
August 18, 2009
Before We Damn Switzerland
On October 27 I was on a visit to Switzerland and wrote about the battle over minarets for the first time. I said that the gravity of this battle went beyond banning minarets because it would lead to the passage of a law in which Islam is officially linked with terrorism and because it would open the door to more legal campaigns by right-wing racist parties aimed at restricting the freedoms of Muslims in the West. In my article I advocated forming a delegation of professors of Islamic civilization and enlightened men of religion to travel to Switzerland in order to explain to the public that the minaret is an Islamic architectural feature and not an emblem of war, as alleged by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party, which started this battle. Al-Shorouk newspaper responded to my suggestion and contacted senior officials in Egypt, but it appears they were not enthusiastic about the idea or were enthusiastic but did not do anything about it, except for the mufti of the republic, whose media adviser happened to be invited to a conference in Switzerland and came back after the vote on banning minarets was over. The truth is that the failure of Egyptian officials to do their duty has become a frequent and saddening phenomenon. In the events surrounding the football match between Egypt and Algeria in Sudan, we saw how the Egyptian authorities were unable to protect Egyptian citizens from the barbaric assault committed by Algerian criminal gangs sent over on military planes by the Algerian government, and how after that they were unable to hold to account those who affronted the dignity of Egyptians.
A few days ago, the referendum result went against us and minarets were banned by law in Switzerland. Egyptians felt angered and wondered how Switzerland could claim to be a democratic country and at the same time prevent Muslims, not members of other religious communities, from building minarets. They asked what harm there is in minarets and why the Swiss do not want to see them in their country. Could similar measures be taken against, for example, Jewish synagogues in Switzerland? The anger of Egyptians is natural and understandable and their questions are legitimate, but before we damn Switzerland we should remember several facts:
First, the ban on minarets in Switzerland does not at all mean that the Swiss have all taken a position against Islam. Almost half the Swiss voters, as well as Swiss government officials and representatives of Christian and Jewish communities of all sects, vigorously defended until the last moment the right of Muslims to build their minarets. In fact, the referendum result led to demonstrations in many Swiss cities in defense of the right of Muslims to practice their religious rites. I received many letters from cultured Swiss friends expressing their deep regret at the ban on minarets, including one from the prominent critic, Angela Schader, who wrote, “I am shocked and ashamed for my country,” and described the ban as “a decision that is stupid, narrow-minded, and cowardly.”
Second, although the referendum is legal and binding under the Swiss constitution, it violates the principles of human rights and a case can be pursued in international forums with a view to overturning the ban. This is the right way to deal with the problem. Calling for boycotts and accusing Switzerland of hostility to Islam would indicate an unfair perception of the Swiss people and would lead to mutual hostility from which only the extremists there would benefit.
Third, the Swiss People’s Party, which provoked this crisis, is one of many right-wing European parties, all of which have racist messages hostile to foreigners and immigrants. The People’s Party has exploited Swiss people’s fear of Islam and their ignorance of its tolerant teachings, and with this referendum it has taken a step that will be followed by other steps. Party officials have stated that they are preparing new referendums against wearing the hijab at work and in educational institutions, against female circumcision, and against separate cemeteries for Muslims. French President Nicolas Sarkozy was quick to support the ban on minarets and said he understood the need for western society to preserve its cultural identity, and voices soon arose in the Netherlands and Germany calling for similar referendums to restrain Muslims. So the battle has not ended with the ban on minarets. It has only started, and we must defend the rights of Muslims by means that are legal, effective, and respectful.
Fourth, from my long experience of western society I believe that we as Muslims are responsible to a large extent for the powerful wave of fear of Islam. This feeling did not exist, or at least was not evident, before the attacks of 9/11. Criminal terrorists such as Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri took it upon themselves to tarnish the image of Islam in the minds of millions of westerners. Suffice it to say that the word ‘jihad’ is now used in western languages to mean armed attacks on civilians and that the term ‘islamisme’ in French has come to mean terrorism, even in academic circles. Add to this the fact that most mosques in the West are financed by Wahhabi oil sheikhs who offer an extreme Salafist interpretation of the religion, which has very much helped to distort its image in western minds. It is enough to know that physical education classes for Muslim girls have become a big problem in Swiss schools because many Muslim parents insist on preventing their young daughters from taking part in physical education and swimming classes (based on erroneous Wahhabi fatwas of course). This forces the school authorities to defend the right of girls to take part and at the same time reinforces the image of Islam as a reactionary religion that sees women only as bodies that cause temptation and are to be used for pleasure. One has to imagine the reaction of westerners when they hear that Islam requires female circumcision (a horrendous crime that has nothing to do with Islam) or when they see a woman wearing the niqab, or face veil, whether with two eye openings or only one, as some Saudi sheikhs advocate. Wahhabi ideas, backed by oil money, provide the worst possible image of Islam to western minds. Those who voted in favor of the ban on minarets in Switzerland are not all racists; they are simply afraid of a religion linked in their minds with violence, murder, backwardness, and the oppression of women. It is our duty to offer the West the correct image of Islam, which created a great civilization that for seven centuries taught the whole world the principles of justice, freedom, and tolerance. If we fail in performing this duty then we will have no right to blame others.
Fifth, the banning of minarets in Switzerland is clearly a flagrant violation of freedom of belief, and Egyptians, Arabs, and Muslims have a right to object to the ban and to try to overturn it by all legal means. But the Egyptian government has no moral right to object to the ban on minarets in Switzerland because it has failed to ensure freedom of belief for Egyptians. The Egyptian authorities regularly arrest Shi’ites and Qur’anists, put them on trial on charges of contempt for religion, and throw them in prison. In fact, the official department headed by the mufti, which is now calling for freedom of belief in Switzerland, has issued an official fatwa declaring Baha’is to be infidels, putting them in danger of being murdered at any moment. These Baha’is are Egyptian citizens who have fought a bitter battle for recognition of their religion in official documents. As for the Coptic Christians, they face the greatest hardship when they try to build new churches or even repair old ones. A uniform law for places of worship that would put mosques and churches on the same legal basis has been buried for many years in the files of the Egyptian government, which refuses even to discuss it.
Freedom of belief means guaranteeing respect and freedom of worship for everyone, whatever their beliefs and their religion. This is just the opposite of what the Egyptian government does. It cannot demand freedom of belief in Switzerland while obstructing it in Egypt. The Egyptian regime, which holds power through repression and fraud, cannot guarantee freedom of belief for its citizens because if you have lost something you cannot then give it away and because freedom of belief will not come about in isolation from other public freedoms and political rights.
Democracy is the solution.
December 6, 2009
An Unfortunate Incident Befalls a State Security Officer
> Last Saturday Amr Bey, an officer in State Security, finished his work unusually early and hurried home. He was happy because he would see his only daughter, Nourhan, who is ten years old and whom he rarely sees during the week. He usually comes home from work after she has gone to bed and when he wakes up she’s already at school. Amr Bey came in and greeted his wife, Nadia, who was in the kitchen, and then quickly headed to his daughter’s room. He opened the door and found her studying. She was wearing a blue work-out outfit and had her hair in a ponytail. He kissed her on the forehead and asked if she had had dinner. She said she would have dinner when she finished her homework. Amr Bey told her he would eat with her, then put out his right hand and patted her on the cheek. Suddenly Nourhan looked terrified and shouted, “Papa, there’s blood on your hand!” Amr Bey looked at his right hand and to his amazement found it covered with congealed blood. Nourhan screamed in horror and her mother rushed in from the kitchen to find out what was happening. Amr Bey kept his cool and tried to reassure his wife and daughter. He went into the bathroom quickly and washed his hand with hot water and soap several times until he had removed all traces of blood. Then he dried it with a towel.
When he came out of the bathroom he found Nadia waiting for him. He kissed her on the cheek and smiled to reassure her. The couple went into the bedroom and Amr Bey started to take off his suit to put on his pajamas and go to bed. But as soon as he looked at his hand he shouted, “Nadia, the blood’s come back!” It was no longer possible to ignore what was happening. Nadia dressed hurriedly and took him off in her car. Amr sat next to her and tried to contact the director of Salam Hospital, whom he knew well. He was holding his cell phone in his left hand because his right hand was completely covered in congealed blood. On the way to the hospital Amr began to wonder where all this blood on the palm of his right hand was coming from. He hadn’t injured himself and he didn’t remember bumping his hand into anything.
Amr Bey mentally went over everything he had done that day. He had arrived at the State Security offices at 1 p.m. and before going to his office he had dropped in on his colleague, Tamer Bey, to make sure he had booked his summer vacation in Marsa Matrouh for August 1, so they could spend it together. Tamer Bey was in the same year as Amr at college and was one of his closest friends. Amr Bey went into Tamer’s office and found him busy interrogating some Islamists who were members of the Wa’d (Promise) group. He saw a man hanging upside down by his feet—the position known as the dabiha, or sacrificial victim—as the detectives gave him repeated electric shocks between his legs. The man was screaming in a horrifying way, while Tamer’s voice boomed through the room. “You know what, momma’s boy, if you don’t confess, I’ll bring your wife, Bothaina, strip her naked, and have the soldiers do her in front of your eyes,” he said. As soon as Tamer Bey caught sight of his friend, Amr Bey, his face lit up and he rushed to shake his hand. Then Tamer took him aside and assured him he had made the booking.
Amr Bey came out of Tamer Bey’s office and decided to say good morning to his colleague, Abdel Khalek Bey, who was interrogating cement plant workers who were on strike. Amr Bey went in and saw a man dressed only in his underwear, tied by the hands and feet, as though crucified, to a piece of wood they call “the Doll.” The man’s body was covered with bruises and wounds. Behind him stood a detective thrashing him with a whip while other detectives were busy beating him violently about the head and face. Abdel Khalek started shouting at him, “So you’re acting the militant and the hero, are you? Very well, momma’s boy, I swear I’m going to make you kiss the soldiers’ boots. I’ll make you wish you were dead, but you won’t be able to die.” Amr Bey greeted his friend, Abdel Khalek, from afar and hurried off so as not to distract him from his work.
After that Amr Bey settled down in his office, where he interrogated two young men from the April 6 Movement who had been inviting people in the street to come out and welcome Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei at the airport. The interrogation was easy because the men had arrived in his office completely exhausted after detectives beat and whipped them through the night, and in fact Amr Bey didn’t have much to do. He gave the men the usual barrage of insults and was about to dismiss them, but he noticed that one of them was looking at him with a certain defiance. He stood up from behind his desk and slapped him on the face several times. This was the signal for the detectives to start a new barrage of kicks and cuffs. At this point Amr Bey shouted at the man, “Say, ‘I’m a woman.’ Come on!” The brutal beating continued but the young man refused to say, “I’m a woman.” Amr Bey gave an order and the detectives started to drag the man about by his feet, with his head banging against the floor as they hit him with their fists and heavy boots until he lost consciousness.
That’s all Amr Bey had done during the day. He went over it in his mind and did not see anything strange or unfamiliar in it. Quite an ordinary day. So where did this congealed blood come from? Amr Bey arrived at the hospital and found the director waiting for him in person. He gave him a thorough check-up and took a blood sample, which was analyzed immediately. With Amr Bey and his wife, Nadia, sitting in his office, the director read the results of the analysis several times, then took off his glasses and said, “Look, sir. People bleed from the palm of the hand in three cases: because of a wound, or because of an overdose of anticoagulants, or, God forbid, because they have a malignant blood disease. You’re not injured, you haven’t taken any anticoagulants, and the blood looks healthy. The fact is, sir, that your case is odd. Let’s wait twenty-four hours and hopefully the bleeding will stop.”
The hospital director prescribed some drugs, gave the officer some bandages to stop his hand from bleeding, and asked him to stop by in the morning for a check-up. Amr Bey did not sleep all night and in the morning he heard his daughter, Nourhan, as she prepared for school. He decided not to go out and see her in case she was frightened by the sight of his bloody hand. He dressed with the help of his wife, who again went with him to the hospital director, who examined him and repeated with regret that there was no medical explanation for the bleeding. The director asked Amr Bey to continue with the drugs and the bandages.
Amr Bey went back home, called the office, and told them he was ill and would not come in that day. He spent a full day in his room, eating nothing despite his wife’s insistence. He would sleep only for a few minutes before waking up to look at his hand and finding it always stained with blood. The next morning his wife came in and found him stretched out on the bed, apparently completely exhausted. But on his face she also saw a new and strange expression. Amr Bey struggled to his feet, dressed with his wife’s help, and asked her to drive him to the office. There he went to the office of the general who was the director of State Security investigations and asked to see him. They let him in straight away. The general welcomed him and was upset when he saw the bandages on his right hand. “Hope it’s not serious, Amr. What’s the problem?”
Amr Bey told the general what had happened and the general scowled. “Strange story,” he said. “Anyway, take time off until you’re better.” But Amr Bey smiled and with his left hand produced a piece of paper that he placed on the desk in front of the general. The general read it quickly and then cried out in disapproval, “What’s all this? Have you gone mad, Amr? Would anyone leave State Security?”
“I implore you, sir.”
“Give yourself a chance to think, my son. You’re one of the best officers in the department and you have a great future. Can you tell me why you want to leave the department?”
At that point, without speaking, Amr Bey held his bloody right hand in front of the general’s face.
Democracy is the solution.
March 7, 2010
Why Was the General Screaming?
The young men and women who came out to demonstrate in the streets of Cairo on April 6 did not break the law or do anything wrong. They only wanted to express their opinion. They were demanding freedom, justice, dignity, fair elections, the abolition of the emerge
ncy law, and constitutional amendments to ensure equal opportunities for all Egyptians to stand in elections. All of these demands are just and legitimate. So why were these youngsters abused and beaten, dragged off and detained? No respectable state in the world punishes its citizens in this brutal way just for expressing their opinions. What happened on April 6 will remain a shameful stain on the reputation of the Egyptian regime forever. The youngsters were surrounded by a cordon of riot police, who pressed in on them until they almost suffocated them, then the karate units of the police pounced on them, hitting the demonstrators on the head and body with thick sticks. I have never seen such barbaric methods used on protesters, other than by the Israeli army against Palestinian demonstrators during the Intifada. Why do Egyptians attack fellow Egyptians with such brutality? The young people were screaming and some had such serious injuries that the asphalt was covered with their blood, but the beatings did not stop.
Finally a man in his fifties appeared, well-built, swarthy, and dressed in civilian clothes, with a large prayer mark on his forehead. The man, addressed as “General” by the policemen, gave orders that the girls be taken out of the cordoned area one by one. “Bring me that whore over there,” he shouted to his assistants in a voice like thunder. Immediately the men rushed off to drag the girl away from her colleagues. The youngsters fought hard to defend the girl, protecting her with their bodies and shielding her from assault, but the police attacked with such ferocity and inflicted so many injuries that in the end their resistance flagged and the police managed to remove the girl. They pushed her from behind and hit her until she was standing facing the general, who greeted her with a barrage of vulgar insults. He raised his hand and slapped her several times, then grabbed her hijab and removed it. Then he took hold of her hair and dragged her along the ground, kicking her as hard as he could as he went until he threw her toward a group of policemen, who kept hitting, slapping, and kicking her until finally they dumped her, a total wreck, in the police wagon. The image of the general attacking girls in the same way appears in all the video material that escaped confiscation by the police.
On the State of Egypt: A Novelist's Provocative Reflections Page 19
