Some Advice To The Egyptian Opposition:
On The Opposition's Negative Image Of Being Anti-Islam
28 December 2012
By Khalid Amayreh
The Egyptian opposition has acquired an image of
being anti-Islam. It must correct this image before
taking part in upcoming parliamentary elections
For the sake of maintaining its credibility, or what
has remained of it, the Egyptian opposition needs to
engage in some deep soul-searching and to practice
some self-directed accountability. This is not to say,
of course, that the opposition represents all that is
bad whereas the other side the Islamists
represents all that is good.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a substantive gap
between what the opposition claims to be and its
public image in the minds of many people, Egyptians
and non-Egyptians alike.
I don't claim to be an expert on Egypt. However, as an
avid follower of developments in the Egyptian arena, I
can say the opposition has much homework to do before
taking part in the upcoming parliamentary elections.
True, the opposition is not monolithic in nature and
is quite diverse politically and ideologically.
Similarly, the opposition varies, occasionally
sharply, in its national and moral credibility.
In general terms, however, the opposition has a
negative image of being anti-Islam. True, opposition
figures and spokespersons would vehemently deny any
hostility to Islam. However, a fleeting glance at the
opposition media discourse in the past few months
shows that the Islamists, including
democratically-elected President Mohamed Morsi, have
been thoroughly demonised.
One Egyptian writer said that the opposition media was
so virulently anti-Islamist that even a prophet of God
would have been besmirched and distorted.
Indeed, opposition to the Islamists seems to have
morphed into an all-out war on Islamist ideology per
se. What else can be said about calling President
Morsi a "thug," "Hitler" and "Mursilini," a snide play
on Mussolini, the infamous Italian dictator?
To be sure, Morsi is not beyond reproach. He can be
criticised and should be criticised, being responsible
for catering for 90 million Egyptians. Nonetheless,
criticism, however mordant and scathing, is one thing;
vulgarity is an entirely different matter. Vulgarity
is libelous, defamatory and incompatible with civility
and good manners.
More to the point, in many instances, vulgarity is
counter-productive; it eventually boomerangs on the
vulgar source, whether it is an individual, newspaper
or TV station. This is why, even the most libertarian
societies promulgate anti-defamation and anti-libel
laws to protect the public from the excesses of the
unbridled media.
Anti-Islam image
The anti-Islam image vindictively promoted by the bulk
of the Egyptian opposition, especially the so-called
secular and civil groups, is by all means a very
serious charge. If consolidated and allowed to become
a permanent feature in the collective public
consciousness (or sub-consciousness), this charge
could prove quite lethal for the opposition and its
electoral chances.
Yes, propaganda coming from the Islamists camp played
a certain role in the dissemination of the contentious
anti-Islam image. However, it is also true that the
opposition is not completely blameless for the
existence of this commonly-held notion.
It is well known, for example, that opposition media
often ridicules Islamic principle as "Ikhwan
(Brotherhood) principles" with regard to a host of
issues such as women rights, status of non-Muslims,
Christians, showbusiness, art and the economy.
Such insinuations are often interpreted by many
ordinary citizens, correctly or otherwise, as
suggesting that the opposition is really against Islam
itself, not merely against the Islamist camp.
This point is further accentuated by the repetition of
often virulent canards about Islamists, including the
so-called "farewell intercourse with newly-dead wives"
and the claim that Islamists are intending to impose
poll taxes on Christians.
Needless to say, spreading such baseless lies exudes
extreme malice, hatred and vindictiveness towards
Islam since the ultimate goal behind the slanders is
to make the public hate the religion that the vast
majority of Egyptians adhere to.
This is why malicious disseminators of such
obscenities ought to be severely punished, since
freedom of speech doesn't include the freedom to
malign, abuse and demonise, especially by way of
lying.
Moreover, the opposition shoots itself in the foot
when it chooses to remain silent whenever the symbols
of Islam are targeted. For example, when Al-Kaed
Ibrahim Mosque in Alexandria was surrounded and Sheikh
Mahallawi was besieged for many hours by mobs of the
opposition, the opposition refused to condemn the
repulsive behavior as if besieging worshipers inside a
mosque was a banal matter that didn't command the
opposition's attention.
There is no doubt in my mind that the opposition would
have gained a lot of popularity and therefore earned
a substantial political capital had it hastened to
sincerely and unequivocally condemn the "shameful
taboo" of besieging a mosque in a country that prides
itself on being the home of Al-Azhar.
Why didn't the opposition even contemplate doing this?
This is a question I leave for each person's
conscience.
The constitution
I believe the opposition didn't tell the people the
whole truth about the real reasons behind the
vociferous rallies and protests it held in several
localities in Egypt. Was it really the draft
constitution? Was it deep-seated ideological hostility
to the Brotherhood, bequeathed from Nasser's era? Was
it a certain desire to induce a coup against the
president? Or was it a certain intent to generate
chaos and turbulence in order to force the military to
intervene and declare a state of emergency in the hope
of nipping Brotherhood rule in the bud?
What exacerbated the incendiary situation further
(some people even started speaking about civil war)
was the lamentable fact that many of the protests held
by the opposition were fraught with decidedly
barbarian acts of sabotage and vandalism, including
the torching of numerous offices of the Muslim
Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party.
The torching of offices is an act of terrorism.
Besides offices and furniture, it set fires in the
hearts of millions of people who voted for the
Islamist parties.
Finally, the opposition needs to make a real departure
from its notoriously convulsive discourse to one based
on reason and honesty.
In the final analysis, the opposition can't call
itself "democratic" and at the same time refuse to
allow the masses to have the final say. In fact, some
segments of the opposition were so unreasonable that
they vehemently refused the outcome of the latest
referendum on the draft constitution.
Finally, the opposition cause suffered a sharp blow
when some opposition protesters communicated to the
public a truly childish and ignorant message when they
chanted "Leave, leave, leave" outside the presidential
palace at Ittihadiya in Cairo. Well, this behaviour,
evidently music to the ears of the leaders of the
opposition, encapsulates a stunning tendency to reject
the rules of democracy.
I don't know how opposition parties will fare in the
next parliamentary elections. However, I do believe
that these parties will suffer miserably if they don't
put their house, or houses, in order now. Perhaps a
little humility, honesty and respect for their
political opponents will help.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments