Despotism and Persecution of the Moderates:
Issam al-Erian as a Model
By Saad Eddin Ibrahim

Based on my first-hand experience in Mubarak's detention centers and my studies of the cases of tens of other political prisoners, I have become convinced that the Mubarak regime cannot tolerate defiance from even the most moderate and peaceful of activists.

In the last year alone, there are two prime examples--Dr.Ayman Nour, founder and head of Al Ghad Party, and Issam al-Erian, a physician and a leading figure of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhawan Al-Muslimin) Movement. Dr. Erian's case again raises the question of why the Mubarak regime insists on using its massive security apparatus and bald-faced lies to eliminate any moderate opposition. The answer is that when the moderate elements are effectively undermined, only extremists and fundamentalists remain. Mubarak can then present himself to Egyptians andWesterners alike as the bulwark against those extremists and the only viable alternative to them. The implicit message is that, should there be a truly open and democratic political process, Egypt could easily slip in the direction of Algeria, the Taliban's Afghanistan, or Khomeini's Iran. Thus ironically, the Mubarak regime depends on the very same extremists and fundamentalist that it claims to be eliminating.

Following this logic, Mubarak has aimed to undermine and defame any moderate alternative(s), Islamic or civil-liberal, in Egypt meanwhile provoking the responses of extremists. The State equally resorts to exaggerating, using any number of readymade accusations, the activities of any opposition and the threat they pose to society and "national unity". To accomplish this, Mubarak's regime relies heavily on the media, with which it's able to spin outright lies into quasi-facts, and the State Security agencies. This parallel system of intelligence (mukhabarat) is given the label "State Security" in order to lend an added sheen of legitimacy to their activities and inspire fear in the general populace. The Investigative Bureau of State Security, or "Dawn Visitors," for example, is a policy apparatus responsible for "making inquiries," that is, arresting, detaining, and harassing the suspects. Their civilian counterpart, the State Security Prosecutor's Bureau, further intimidates and interrogates the victims, obtains false confessions, and has the power to renew their imprisonment until such time as the responsible of both organizations sends the case to the notorious State Security Court.

The Court's name has been recently changed due to its odious reputation
and the international embarrassment it has caused this regime, but this
change is purely cosmetic as all the districts and presiding judges remain
the same.Ayman Nour's case, for example, was sent before the very same
district judges that sentenced me to seven years in prison before the Court
of Cassation overturned the ruling and bitterly criticized the former court.
Mubarak's regime constantly emphasizes that all cases representing
ideological differences are not political cases, but "purely criminal ones.”

This claim was repeated in the proceedings brought against Ibn Khaldun,
Ayman Nour and Issam al-Erian. In fact, these cases are all vengeful
political cases initiated and prosecuted by highest sovereign institution in
the country. Despite certain undeniable similarities between the three
cases, we must still ask: Why was Issam al-Erian targeted in particular?
I have known Issam al-Erian for over a quarter of a century. He was studying medicine when I returned after completing my Ph.D. abroad. Given my academic interest in the Islamic Movement, it was only natural
that I should make his acquaintance; he was one of the emerging leaders and an active participant in the youth branch of Ikhwan al-Muslimin (The Muslim Brotherhood). This group had recently denounced the use of
violence in an unpublicized deal with the late President Sadat in 1972.Very few believed this announcement at the time and, presently, many still have their doubts.

However, as an academician part of my job has been not only to study the Ikhwan's behavior in Egyptian public life but also to listen carefully to what they have to say and to try and understand their point of view. I did the same with other branches of the Islamic movement which split from the Ikhwan such as the Jihad, the Jamaa al-Islamiyya and the Takfir wa-l-Hijra. In all these academic efforts Erian was a first-rate peer and debater. Although I am fifteen years his senior and of a different ideological persuasion, a mutual respect and a warm, humane friendship developed between us. We became colleagues in trade union activity, I as the chair of Sociological Trade Union and he as the secretary of the Medical Trade Union, and accepted numerous invitations to speak at each other's organizations.We were also inmates together in Mubarak's prisons and we have often discussed the difficulties we experienced there as well
as exchanged many witticisms and anecdotes.

During the last couple of years, Issam al-Erian and I met at two important conferences. The first was in April 2001, one month after the Cassation Court had exonerated me and 27 other Ibn Khaldun colleagues. That conference was a continuation of my dialogue in prison with Islamist groups. At that time, these groups were astonished at the amount of international attention paid to the Ibn Khaldun case as compared with their own. I posited that they were not talking in a language the international community could relate to and that their image abroad was one of hatred, fanaticism and violence. When they argued to convince me otherwise, my answer was that what matters is to convince the world. When they had time to prepare for this, I organized a one-day dialogue with a number ofWestern diplomats in Cairo during which Erian was a brilliant star who captivated the Western audience despite their disagreement with him over a number of issues.

The last occasion was in December 2004 in Jordan, at a conference organized by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy in which a number of Americans, Muslim and non-Muslim, participated. Following
the Americans' suggestion of using debate as a method for the peaceful settlement of differences, we were both asked to role-play and to defend positions that were not necessarily our own. Erian had to argue in favor of secular democracy and against the implementation of Sharia and the establishment of a theocracy. To everyone's great surprise, he did so convincingly.

In twenty-five years, I have never heard Erian call for violence against, or hatred of, non-Muslims. Erian was an outstanding student of medicine as well as a talented trade union activist. He ran for parliament membership and his performance at the People's Assembly was excellent as is testified by his colleagues from other political parties including the ruling National Party. It is in all likelihood because of his moderate attitude and his outstanding leadership qualities that Mubarak's regime put Issam al-Erian behind bars.

So, let all the free people in Egypt and the world unite with him.
Hands off Issam al-Erian, Mubarak!