Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies - Articles by Dr. Saad Eddin Ibrahim

Cairo -- The horrific terrorist attack in London on 7/7 understandably dominated the world's airwaves. It dwarfed other newsworthy events, including the G-8 Summit with its important agenda for combating African poverty and global warming. London's 7/7 is now added to New York and Washington's 9/11 and Madrid's 3/11 and the other terrorist tragedies which have spanned all six continents in four years.

Another significant tragedy unfolded on the same day in the Arab World. The Zarkawi-led branch of al Qaeda in Iraq announced the execution of Ambassador Ihab Sherif, the senior Egyptian envoy to Iraq, who in their words represented "an infidel regime that has long befriended Christians and Jews." While similar atrocities have been common in Iraq in the last two years, this was the first time an Egyptian of prominence was struck down. The entire country was stunned. Egyptians consider themselves an elder Arab brother who has long been sacrificing for the rest of the Arab World, and hence deserves to be treated with affection, gratitude and respect. For their envoy to be slaughtered in such a barbaric fashion by fellow Arab Muslims was unthinkable.

But there was more to the tragedy between Cairo and Baghdad. The Mubarak regime, bowing to popular sentiments, had declared its opposition to the war in Iraq back in 2003. Meanwhile, Mubarak has tried to maintain good relations with the US government. After all, he is the second major recipient of its foreign aid, some $2 billion annually. However, as the Bush administration announced its plans for promoting democracy in the region, Mubarak and other Arab autocrats got increasingly nervous. In response to US Middle East Partnership Initiative in November 2002 and the Broader Middle East and North African Initiative on the G-8 in 2004, Mubarak summoned his fellow autocrats to stand fast against " foreign intervention" and " externally imposed reform".

Iraq represented a battleground between autocratic and democratic visions of the Arab future. As the war dragged on, a third theocratic vision also raised its head in the country. At times Arab autocrats sided more with the theocrats, whose threat seemed less eminent than that of the democrats, whether home-grown or western supported. So much was this the case that one seasoned regional observer noted on the second anniversary of the Iraq war that the continued debacle of the US coalition forces was not just attributable to insurgent forces of all kinds, but also a result of Middle Eastern autocratic regimes joining forces in hopes that the Iraqi democratic experiment would fail spectacularly, thus giving them a new lease on life. Mubarak took the lead role, having already over-used the bloody civil war in Algeria to scare his fellow Egyptians and westerners about Islamist political movements. It was not until the Algerian government filed a formal protest against the frequent inflammatory invocation of the country's name three years ago that Mubarak backed off. Now he could substitute Iraq, warning about the disorder that follows rapid attempts to democratize.

The shock and grief of all Egyptians over the slaying of their ambassador in Baghdad swiftly gave way to angry questioning of the regime. Why did they have to learn about posting an ambassador to Iraq only after other Arab satellite channels announced his name and kidnapped status? Why did the Egyptian authorities persist in describing the abduction as a ‘disappearance" instead of a kidnapping as other news sources were reporting? Why did the ambassador move around the city without proper security protection? (He was buying newspapers when he was abducted in a busy Baghdad street.) How come the Mubarak regime suddenly changed its position on the legitimacy of the provisional government in Baghdad, which it had previously tagged as the "client of foreign occupiers"?

The lack of credible answers to these and other related questions can be traced to Mubarak's cynical policy duality. Example: At the highest official level behind closed doors or following bilateral talks, the regime proudly reiterates the close strategic links it enjoys with the US. Meanwhile, the state-sponsored media gives the unmistakable impression that the US is Egypt's enemy number 2, second only to Israel. By the same token, Mubarak's media have portrayed the insurgents in Iraq as ‘the resistance' and ‘freedom fighters'. Even when they commit atrocities against Iraqi and Arab civilians they were never labeled terrorists, and when insurgents are killed they become ‘martyrs'. This created a major dilemma for the regime when Amb. Sherif was executed, requiring them to make a one hundred eighty degree turn. Freedom fighters now became terrorists.

Mubarak's thinly veiled dualism was revealed in other ways this week. An Egyptian Muslim cleric by the name of Sheikh Youssef Qaradawy, self-exiled in Qatar, is infamous for his hateful religious edicts (fatwas) against non-Muslims. One of these fatwas legitimated beheading of civilian foreigners in Iraq. Under international pressure to condemn this, the Mubarak regime got his own Sheik el Azhar to issue a counter-edict against these killings. But now that Mubarak faces a fall election (to his fifth six-year term), and knowing that Qaradawy enjoys some popular support, he decided to invite him back to Egypt. On the day following the London bombings and the Baghdad slaughter he gave Qaradawy a hero's welcome at the Cairo airport.

At a loss to make sense of all the above, and probably without clear instructions, the new editor in chief of Egypt's state-controlled daily newspaper Al Ahram came out with the following: "The United States bears the major responsibility for the slaughter of the Egyptian ambassador in Baghdad, as it has created anarchy and violence that made the heinous act possible."

With opposition demonstrations increasing and only seven weeks to go before the presidential elections, expect more confusion and reversals from the Mubarak camp. It is an increasingly pathetic performance, and the Egyptian people deserve better.