July 3, 2013
By Saeed Qureshi
Egyptian army has removed President Muhammad Morsi
of Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) and has taken over power for the interim period.
President Morsi assumed office on June 30, 2012 and has been deposed from his
office today (July 3, 2013).
The decision to depose Morsi is taken by a
council consisting of the defense minister Abdul Fatah Khalil Al-Sisi, the political
figure Mohamed ElBaradei, the Grand
Imam of Al Azhar, and the Coptic Pope.The army’s action to depose president Morsi is
being termed as a military coup against the ousted president.
The interim period during which the council
would replace Morsi means until holding of next elections for a newly elected government
to step in. Following massive protests
calling for his resignation, Morsi claims that his presidency is still valid
and refuses to leave office.
.
Following the pitched protests at
the famous Tehrir Square, the Egyptian
Armed forces, on July 1, issued a
48-hour ultimatum which gave the country's political parties until 3 July to
meet the demands of the Egyptian people. The Egyptian military also threatened
to intervene if the dispute was not resolved by the government by that time.
On the expiry of three days deadline,
the army moved into action of deposing president Morsi. The military plans to suspend the constitution, dissolve the
parliament, and establish an interim government to be headed by the chief
justice.
One is reminded
of the 2011 massive protests at the Cairo’s Tehrir Square for several weeks forcing
the then president Hosni Mubarak to resign. As a result of the May-June 2012
elections, the Freedom and Justice Party headed by Mr. Morsi, with total support
from the Muslim Brotherhood, won the elections.
But what the
people of Egypt expected of the new government was not achieved. The people
wanted civil liberties, social independence, and a combination of secular and Islamic
culture. They wanted revolutionary changes for recovery of the economy and to
refurbish Egyptian role as a leading power in the Middle East.
Primarily
Muhammad Morsi, as a staunch leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, could not go beyond
a certain limit to secularize the society and to switch over the political paradigm
to an entirely western type of democracy. He wavered and got stuck up between
an Islamic system of government and a democratic dispensation that would open up
the society and free it from ideological barriers.
Thus far it could
have been accepted by the Egyptian people who rendered historic role and
offered great sacrifices for removal of the authoritarian regime of Hosni Mubarak.
But the people felt that instead of a military head of state, they were under
the sway of a kind of fundamentalism that was as suffocating and oppressive as
the military that ruled over Egypt since Anwar Sadat for 41 years.
As if adding insult
to injury, president Morsi made certain decisions that were leading towards making
him a kind of despot under the farce of democracy. He did not look much different
from his hated predecessor who ruled Egypt with an iron hand brooking no opposition.
It was not expected of Morsi to grant himself unlimited powers to
"protect" the nation in late November 2012, besides assuming power to legislate without judicial oversight or review of his acts.
Although later in
face of huge demonstrations against his questionable decision, he annulled his
decree which had expanded his presidential authority and removed judicial
review, yet he announced that the effects of that declaration would remain intact.
It was like taking from one hand what he gave from the other.
On 30 June 2013, the mammoth crowd of protesters stated
assembling in the famous Tehrir square calling upon Mrsi to resign. The
swelling protests prompted the army to issue the ultimatum to the Morsi that
if the protesters' demands were not met by 3 July it would step in and build a
road map for the country. It however, clarified that it did not want to rule.
In order to
explore and analyze the failure of Morsi and his premature departure from the power,
three factors can be highlighted. First, ideologically, the President was unfit
to lead a nation yearning for a colossal progressive change, for liberty, human
rights, civil society, constitutionalism and a truly democratic dispensation.
The institution of
democracy was installed with the popular vote but for its sustenance only a
democratic-minded and moderate leader could be successful. Morsi was totally imbued and brought up under the
ultra conservative religious ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood that would keep
the state governance within the orthodox parameters of Islam. So here was a contradiction
between what the majority of Egyptian expected form the Arab Spring and what
they found as a result of their protests for a change.
President Morsi
seemed to be too much in a haste to usurp and concentrate powers in his person
so as to stifle any opposition that might accrue from his mission of putting Egypt
on the path of a rigid Islamic system in sync with the doctrine and philosophy
of the Akhwan-al-Muslimeen (Muslim Brotherhood).
Unlike other
countries where liberal regimes came into being, Morsi wanted to replace the
military dictatorship with a kind of theological over-lordship. That did not work
with the demand of the Egyptian people especially the youth who wanted a liberalized
and emancipated Egypt like the west or the one that was established in Tunisia.
Secondly, the Egyptian
army could not accept a person like Morsi as the head of state whose party has
been in a state of perpetual confrontation with Hosni Mubarak and the armed
forces in general for three decades. All the more he became a thorn for the
army, when he sacked several army generals including the military chief Mohamed Hussein Tantavi, as soon he became the president.
Those decisions
were his constitutional prerogatives and indeed were legitimate, yet these were
repugnant for an army that was ruling the roost for three decades. So the army
was on the lookout and the people returning to the Tehrir Square was the last
straw and a robust excuse to remove Morsi. Had the army taken this decision without
the popular uproar, it would have never succeeded.
The third strong
catalyst in the deposition of Morsi was the deep ire and annoyance of Israel that
was quite troubled and upset over the hard hitting anti-Jews statements that
Morsi has been issuing from time to time.
For instance in a
highly stinging statement in September 2010, he called the Israelis
"blood-suckers", "warmongers" and "Descendants of apes
and pigs", In another daring
statement he lambasted Israel by saying
that “The land of Palestine belongs to the Palestinians, not to the
Zionists”.
There could also be
a backdoor collusion between Israel and the Egyptian army to remove Muhammad
Morsi from the political stage of Egypt. He was acceptable neither to the Egyptian
army nor to Israel.
Israel wants to maintain
the same relations that were in vogue with Egypt, under President Anwar Sadat since
October 1970 (killed by the Akhwan related army officers in October 1981) and
continued by his successor Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak was too ousted from power on
11 February 2011, following 18 days of unprecedented demonstrations by the Egyptian
people.
No comments:
Post a Comment