Obey me, acrylic cartoon by Rauky Painter, France, 2007.
What is called a ‘parliament’ in Egypt is a joke. Egypt is ruled by a dictatorship, and such has been the case since 1952; and its parliament is but the handmaid of the tyrant at the top of the dictatorial regime. And the current so-called parliament is not an exception – it does what President Abdul Fatah al-Sisi wants it to do, and this is basically what ‘parliaments’ are there for under all dictatorships: it had no respect or dignity that we can say it has lost. And so, this week, we have seen it approving constitutional amendments that would allow al-Sisi to stay in power until 2030. He has come to power in 2013 on the top of the tanks. He exploited the popular uprising on 30 June 2013 to oust the Muslim Brotherhood rule, not to hand the power to non-Islamist civilians, but to reinstate the military dictatorship that was established in the Nasser’s coup d’état in 1952 to power – a dictatorial rule by the army that is responsible for ending the liberal and democratic experiment of Egypt prior to it, and that is responsible for much of Egypt’s current political, economic and social ills. And today, in a three-day referendum, the al-Sisi regime is asking Egyptian ‘voters’ to back the proposed constitutional changes.[1]
The Coptic Nationalists do not support that, and their position is principled and based on two reasons:
- They believe that Egypt’s political, economic and social multiple ills cannot be managed except in a democracy.
- They believe that the Coptic Question cannot be solved except in a democracy.
The silly question is often raised: “But what substitute do you have?” It is silly because the substitute we ask for is not a substitute of individuals but of a regime – we want democracy to replace dictatorship, be it civilian or military.
The Copts have recently fallen into the trap of believing that they could not be protected from the Islamists except through a military dictatorship. And hence, many Copts have resorted to backing al-Sisi’s dictatorship. They are of course mistaken, for the military dictatorship since 1952 has never been secular but sectarian, using Islam to bolster its rule, and resorting to Islamists of some sort to justify its regime: even Nasser, who is the least in using Islam in politics, did use the Islam of al-Azhar to strengthen its grip on power. Military dictatorships of Sadat used the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists, and Mubarak, too, used them. They both led to the dominance of the Islamists in Egyptian politics: for as long as the Islamists don’t attack them, the Islamists are given a free hand on the Copts. And President al-Sisi is not an exception: the Salafists underpin his true; and despite his rhetoric directed at the Western powers, he allows the Salafists to roam wild in Upper Egypt to attach the Copts, destroy their properties and churches, and force them to emigrate from the governorates of Minya, Asyut, Sohaj and Qina where they are in large concentration.
We strongly believe this: al-Sisi is not anti-Islamist. He has emerged as anti-Muslim Brotherhood, but this is solely on the base of power struggle. The Salafists, who are not less dangerous and anti-Copts, are his friends.
Again, we repeat: Egypt’s multi-ills cannot be sorted out except in a democracy. The military dictatorship only potentiates them. Further, the Coptic Problem cannot be solved except in a democratic system.
____________________________
[1] See: BBC, Egypt constitutional changes could mean Sisi rule until 2030, and BBC, Egypt referendum: Voters urged to back extended Sisi term.