|
Print this page
Despotism and Persecution
of the Moderates:
Issam al-Erian as a Model
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!
|