The tide is changing for the army
Issandr El AmraniWhen the uprising began in Egypt and tanks deployed on the streets on January 28, the military was initially welcomed. Perhaps many thought it had carried out a coup against Mubarak (in fact it probably partially has), and many more still cherished the myth of the Egyptian army triumphant in 1973 after the defeat of 1967. Things began to turn last week when the army stood and did nothing while pro-Mubarak thugs attacked the crowd in Tahrir. The protestors issued an ultimatum to the army to pick its side: with them, or with Mubarak. The army has still done nothing. Then, over the weekend, military police (and probably military intelligence) were deployed to beef up security on the streets. It then came out that they have been arresting dozens if not hundreds of people, and began raiding the offices of human rights activists and visiting the homes of people asking to poke around their computers.
The Guardian has two important stories on this today. One is a personal account by one of their correspondent, Robert Tait, about torture taking place in the last few days. The other is a straight news story citing human rights activists about this growing campaign carried out by the military:
The Egyptian military has secretly detained hundreds and possibly thousands of suspected government opponents since mass protests against President Hosni Mubarak began, and at least some of these detainees have been tortured, according to testimony gathered by the Guardian.
The military has claimed to be neutral, merely keeping anti-Mubarak protesters and loyalists apart. But human rights campaigners say this is clearly no longer the case, accusing the army of involvement in both disappearances and torture – abuses Egyptians have for years associated with the notorious state security intelligence (SSI) but not the army.
The Guardian has spoken to detainees who say they have suffered extensive beatings and other abuses at the hands of the military in what appears to be an organised campaign of intimidation. Human rights groups have documented the use of electric shocks on some of those held by the army.
Word of this is going to spread and will begin to counter the dominant narrative in Egyptian media about the people and the army being one. The longer this crisis persists, the more difficult for the army to continue either playing a double game or sitting on the fence. With Omar Suleiman's threats of coups and the protests spreading to work stoppages across the country, decision time will be coming for the protestors to make up their minds about the army (or launch a more pronounced campaign to persuade commanders), for the army's leadership to decide how it will proceed in a context where it is losing control, and for rank-and-file in the military to decide where they stand in all this.
Reader Comments (8)
Whoa... Hold your horses!
The Egyptians regard the outcome of the 1973 world a "Triumph"?
Admitting they did have a huge success in the initial first 3 days, and managed to hit the Israeli Army pretty hard, but from their it all went down hill. When the cease fire was declared the Egyptian Army held less territories then before the war started.
Wolf you seem to be one of those Israeli militarists, whose credo seems to be mine is bigger than yours. Can we not agree there is no such thing as one size fits all. For Israel it is five minutes past twelve. it is time to change to the bright side and join us in the 21st century. Make peace with Palestine and your neighboours before it is too late, and do not blame anybody but yourself if you fail.
Actually it is this distortion of history which prevents anyone from reaching any agreement. The Arab side is unwilling to accept the Jewish historical claim and the Jews are trying to wipe 1200 years of Muslim rule.
As long as people are rewriting history they are cementing a one side dialog.
When I first heard that Egyptians regard the Israel-Egypt peace agreement as a "Humiliation to the Egyptian people" and wanted to open up those agreements, a step that might lead to war, I was confused and didn't understand why they regarded the agreement as a humiliation.
Now I understand. If they perceive the 1973 as a victory, then any concession on their part can be considered as a humiliation.
If the Egyptians understood that the outcome of the 1973 war was a sound defeat for their military they would have also understood that the peace treaty was no concession on their part, and thus not humiliating.
My point, lying about history can have a very bad effect. Please stop lying.
Wolf, this is the common understanding of the 1973 war in Egypt. Obviously militarily it's wrong (after the first few days initially) but certainly they won something of a political victory thereafter. Anyway, my point is that this is the Egyptian perception, not that it's the reality.
History is littered with distortion throughout the ages and yet most of us have managed to move on. American and Israel middle east policies are fifty years old. They have not moved an inch since then. They make treaties and when they fail they blame the other side. They stockpile nukes and refuse to declare them or join the NPT. Yet they do not hasitate to point fingers at the other side. They claim they want peace yet at the same time they fence in Gaza and create the biggest prison on the planet. Of course they blame the other side. This is about persistent double standards and not about history.
In his book "Geography," the Dutch-American historian Hendrik Van Loon wrote of the French Revolution that Louis XVI and his advisors fell into the bad habit of finally agreeing to give the people A after they had already moved on to demanding A, B and C, at which point Louis would offer B, only to find that the people now wanted A through D -- "and so it went, all the way to the guillotine."
Apparently, Mubarak, like the Bourbons, has learned nothing and forgot nothing.
>American and Israel middle east policies are fifty years old. They have not moved an inch since then.
Well, i think the American middle east policy has moved about 1,000 miles in the hours since you wrote this.
Anyway, thanks Issam for the analysis and for the link to Jonathan Wright's page. I had read in a recent piece on some of the original organizers that they had used test marches - trips to different neighborhoods to see whether people from different classes would rally around them and what they would do. By some odd chance, Wright seems to have been present for one on Jan. 26th.
Amazing things happening.
Darn it. Issandr, not Issam. I apologize. Should have scrolled up before I posted.