I never saw anyone claim this. Perhaps you could cite some examples?planctom wrote:I remember some time ago that liberals said the MB was dead,would never become a important political force.
Quite probably we are checking different sources.
I never saw anyone claim this. Perhaps you could cite some examples?planctom wrote:I remember some time ago that liberals said the MB was dead,would never become a important political force.
Egypt's Islamist president begins building government
By Edmund Blair and Alastair Macdonald
CAIRO (Reuters) - Mohamed Morsy of the Muslim Brotherhood sets about building a civilian administration for Egypt on Monday that can heal a divisive history of oppression and coax a mistrustful army into relaxing its grip on power.
Behind the scenes, talks were already under way between the Islamists and generals to resolve disputes that blew up this month over steps by the ruling military council to hem in the powers of the first freely elected president Egypt has known.
Cairo's Tahrir Square, theatre of the revolution that ousted Hosni Mubarak, exploded in joy - and relief - on Sunday as Morsy was declared the narrow but convincing winner of last weekend's presidential run-off against Ahmed Shafik, another scion of the military establishment which has ruled Egypt for 60 years.
The celebrations continued through an unforgettable night after Morsy won by 3.5 percentage points or some 880,000 votes.
Those in Egypt and beyond who feared a win for Shafik might have spelled the end of the Arab Spring acknowledged a triumph for the popular will, and for the army which accepted it. From Syria's opposition came word that Cairo was again a "source of hope" for a people "facing a repressive war of annihilation."
.
He will have to spar with the generals, who, just after the election, stripped much of the power from the presidency, . .
[..]
Asked if Mr. Morsi had what it takes to overcome those challenges, Mr. Habib said, “No, he doesn’t.”
Mr. Morsi, 60 an engineer with a doctorate in materials science from the University of Southern California, taught engineering at another California college and at Zagazig University in the Nile Delta.
A lackluster, accidental candidate, he was chosen to run after the Brotherhood’s first choice, Khairat el-Shater, was disqualified.
Married with five grown children, Mr. Morsi has a reputation as a religious conservative and a company man, an enforcer for the group who brooks little internal dissent. During the campaign, he portrayed himself as a defender of strict religious values one minute, a moderate courting liberals the next — doing little to burnish his reputation.
“Morsi is an accident of history. He’s a fairly unremarkable guy,” said Shadi Hamid, a fellow at the Brookings Doha Center. “I guess the real question is, can he change?”
.
Egypt's Islamist president takes revolution to palace
CAIRO (Reuters) - Mohamed Mursi, Egypt's first freely elected president whose powers have already been curbed by the army, began work on a coalition on Monday after touring his new palace, once home of Hosni Mubarak who banned his movement for three decades.
Declared winner on Sunday a week after a tumultuous run-off vote that pitted him against a former air force chief, the Islamist faces the challenge of meeting sky-high expectations in a nation tired of turmoil while the economy is on the ropes.
...
Egyptian newspapers welcomed Mursi's win over Ahmed Shafik, Mubarak's last prime minister, as a victory for the people, although many more liberal-minded Egyptians worry his conservative group will slowly whittle away at social freedoms.
...
As president, Mursi can appoint the cabinet. His aides say he has already reached out to politicians from outside the Brotherhood such as reformist Mohamed ElBaradei, who has yet to publicly respond. But legislative powers remain with the army while the parliament is dissolved, restricting his power to act.
Egypt's army-appointed government, led by al-Ganzouri who also served in the 1990s as prime minister under Mubarak, submitted its resignation on Monday but was asked to stay on temporarily until Mursi, who has yet to take the oath of office, put a team together, Information Minister Ahmed Anis said
"The revolution reaches the republican palace," wrote Al-Shorouk newspaper. Another, Al-Akhbar, quoted from Mursi's victory speech: "I am a servant of the people and an employee of the citizens".
It is a sentiment widely spoken: the sense that at last, perhaps, Egyptians have a leader who can be "fired".
Celebrations in Cairo's Tahrir Square - theatre of the revolution that overthrew Mubarak - extended through the night. Some Brotherhood followers were still celebrating, surprised by their victory that broke a six-decade tradition of presidents plucked from the military.
But the military and Morsi could always split things down the middle, more or less.Ibrahim wrote:Now Morsy has won, but if the military respects the result of the election and relinquishes power then what is that but democracy? And if they don't then what is that but the denial of democracy, which will in turn mean the extension of the revolution?Azrael wrote:It may be better for Egyptian democracy if Shafik wins. If Morsi wins, most likely the Muslim brotherhood would cut a deal with the military and the revolution would be over.
I agree.The real test is always succession. Assuming Morsy has some powers, and the new parliament gets to draft some kind of constitution, the test will be, as it always is, whether or not that constitution would be observed, and if Morsy accepts defeat in subsequent open elections allowing the change of power along with electoral will that is essential in a democracy.
Sure; but that wasn't what I was saying. The MB has cut deals with the military (and Mubarak) in the past, and could do so again.But the mere fact of the Muslim Brotherhood's existence doesn't really have anything to do with the electoral process or democracy.
You might be right.Ibrahim wrote:Well, the military banned, jailed and tortured them in the past. The fact that Morsy is President at all indicates some kind of "deal" with the military, but how else to proceed? Between Morsy and the former general and influential spy network apparachik it's hard to see Morsy being worse for the Egyptian revolution.
Agreed.Anyway to me the positive is that Egyptians voted in what observers agree was a legitimate election, and the man they voted for is now President.
Agreed.What comes next is of course important, but the first step has been taken.
This site was slow/acting up a bit for me this afternoon as well.Azrael wrote:You might be right.Ibrahim wrote:Well, the military banned, jailed and tortured them in the past. The fact that Morsy is President at all indicates some kind of "deal" with the military, but how else to proceed? Between Morsy and the former general and influential spy network apparachik it's hard to see Morsy being worse for the Egyptian revolution.
Agreed.Anyway to me the positive is that Egyptians voted in what observers agree was a legitimate election, and the man they voted for is now President.
Agreed.What comes next is of course important, but the first step has been taken.
Note: I edited my post right above yours before I saw your response (there seem to be some website issues). As I said in my edit, there have been some good signs.
Things seem to be working remarkably well. Just a few years ago, all of this would have been unthinkable. People have to work things out themselves because clearly, as decades of dictatorship showed, a dictatorial regime cannot (and has no incentive) to do it. It would be insane to keep trying to do the same thing if it doesn't work, as you say. Only an durian would think that the 'geniuses' at the State Department could manage to contain hundreds of millions of people from North Africa to Pakistan indefinitely, right?Mr. Perfect wrote:I guess Ibs has a pretty low expectation of what Arabs can do.
My position exactly. The line from people who hate Arabs/Muslims has consistently been "everything isn't immediately perfect, haha stupid Arabs your revolution is a failure and I'm thrilled." This is clearly the position of a child. The only reasonable approach is to recognize both advances and issues that still need to be address. Cautious optimism is the least we owe to people overthrowing dictators. All the more so if your country was bankrolling that dictator for decades.Zack Morris wrote:Things seem to be working remarkably well. Just a few years ago, all of this would have been unthinkable.
This is another key point, or perhaps even less a point and more a moral precept. Egyptians (or Greeks or anybody else) may vote themselves right into the dumpster, but that's their prerogative. What's the alternative?People have to work things out themselves
I think the US government is less about national-building and more about kill-lists. The former was too hard, too expensive, and didn't really interest the locals for the most part.Only an durian would think that the 'geniuses' at the State Department could manage to contain hundreds of millions of people from North Africa to Pakistan indefinitely, right?
Thank you VERY Much for your post, Azrael.Azrael wrote:But the military and Morsi could always split things down the middle, more or less.Ibrahim wrote:Now Morsy has won, but if the military respects the result of the election and relinquishes power then what is that but democracy? And if they don't then what is that but the denial of democracy, which will in turn mean the extension of the revolution?Azrael wrote:It may be better for Egyptian democracy if Shafik wins. If Morsi wins, most likely the Muslim brotherhood would cut a deal with the military and the revolution would be over.
I agree.The real test is always succession. Assuming Morsy has some powers, and the new parliament gets to draft some kind of constitution, the test will be, as it always is, whether or not that constitution would be observed, and if Morsy accepts defeat in subsequent open elections allowing the change of power along with electoral will that is essential in a democracy.
Sure; but that wasn't what I was saying. The MB has cut deals with the military (and Mubarak) in the past, and could do so again.But the mere fact of the Muslim Brotherhood's existence doesn't really have anything to do with the electoral process or democracy.
I should note that, over the last few days, there have been some good signs from Morsi (a female and Christian VP, for example).
I sincerely hope you are right.........I should note that, over the last few days, there have been some good signs from Morsi (a female and Christian VP, for example).
You are so very, very young. The right wing wanted to democratize, iow was "thinking" (as in thinkable) of democratizing the ME in 2001. We had elections in Iraq a long time ago, and elections in Pali lands. And the voted for Hamas! There is just so much stuff you just don't know.Zack Morris wrote:Things seem to be working remarkably well. Just a few years ago, all of this would have been unthinkable. People have to work things out themselves because clearly, as decades of dictatorship showed, a dictatorial regime cannot (and has no incentive) to do it. It would be insane to keep trying to do the same thing if it doesn't work, as you say. Only an durian would think that the 'geniuses' at the State Department could manage to contain hundreds of millions of people from North Africa to Pakistan indefinitely, right?Mr. Perfect wrote:I guess Ibs has a pretty low expectation of what Arabs can do.
yeah, on that;ibrahim wrote:This is clearly the position of a child.
Maybe think about the wording a little bit better next time.Ibrahim wrote:[Egyptians may vote themselves right into the dumpster, but that's their prerogative. What's the alternative?
Egypt's army, Islamists tussle over Mursi's oath
By Marwa Awad
CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's presidency planned to reveal on Thursday how Islamist President-elect Mohamed Mursi would be sworn in at the weekend in a ceremony whose symbolism the Muslim Brotherhood and interim military rulers have both struggled to shape.
With the oath-taking and a planned army handover of power to the president only two days away, there was still no official word on how an important moment in Egypt's transition would unfold.
Army sources said the handover segment would be delayed from Saturday, without giving a reason. They set no new date.
Mursi's office promised a statement later in the day but did not say if differences with the army had been resolved.
The Brotherhood wanted the president sworn in by parliament in line with past custom, but an army-backed court dissolved the Islamist-dominated lower house earlier this month. The generals said the same court should hear Mursi take his oath of office.
The army council that has ruled Egypt since pushing former President Hosni Mubarak aside to calm a popular uprising last year has promised to hand back control by July 1.
Milo wrote:.
For a hated institution that apparently has no popular support outside of the people it's paying, and tepid support with the people it is paying, the Egyptian military has played its cards very shrewdly indeed. It seems to me that someone is whispering in their ear, likely the United States/Saudi Arabia. The Muslim brotherhood is a huge threat to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The salafist party in Egypt is backed by Saudi Arabia and apparently the military is as well now, at least, backed as a spoiler.
.
I think you mean cutting them billion dollar cheques. Great analysis though.Milo wrote:For a hated institution that apparently has no popular support outside of the people it's paying, and tepid support with the people it is paying, the Egyptian military has played its cards very shrewdly indeed. It seems to me that someone is whispering in their ear, likely the United States/Saudi Arabia.
Well, not he MB specifically but various religious conservative parties, sure. Good thing they have all those US weapons and US-trained troops to gun down any democracy protesters that happen to turn out. It's return on the investment of buying all of those Congressmen.The Muslim brotherhood is a huge threat to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The right wing invaded Iraq, murdered a bunch of civilians, and then 'democratized' it by handing out contracts and political appointments to buddies like Haliburton and Chalabi. I'm sure you would have disliked it if the Spanish or the French had attempted to 'democratize' the New England colonies. The Egyptians democratizing themselves, that's another thing altogether.Mr. Perfect wrote: You are so very, very young. The right wing wanted to democratize, iow was "thinking" (as in thinkable) of democratizing the ME in 2001. We had elections in Iraq a long time ago, and elections in Pali lands. And the voted for Hamas! There is just so much stuff you just don't know.
I think we'll worry about the treatment of gays right here in our own country first. If any of the above comes to pass in Egypt, we can denounce them for it then, but we should start with cleaning up our own backyard first. Maybe you'd like to help?Mr. Perfect wrote:Ibs, how do you think gay marriage is going to play out? Tinker? Any ideas?
On the issue of women and gender the Muslim Brotherhood interprets Islam conservatively. Its founder called for "a campaign against ostentation in dress and loose behavior", "segregation of male and female students", a separate curriculum for girls, and "the prohibition of dancing and other such pastimes ... "[16]
Fixed.Zack Morris wrote: Clinton invaded the Balkans, murdered a bunch of civilians, and then 'democratized' it by handing out contracts and political appointments to buddies like Haliburton and Chalabi.
I don't know, it worked pretty well in Japan and Germany, the conventional wisdom is now that it isn't possible in the ME. Who is the real loser in that case I wonder. Either way, the reason democracy became unthinkable in the ME was because of you guys.I'm sure you would have disliked it if the Spanish or the French had attempted to 'democratize' the New England colonies. The Egyptians democratizing themselves, that's another thing altogether.
Germany and Japan: a Western nation and a nation trying hard to Westernize itself. Both nations with similar cultural attitudes toward governance and modernization, with a stable separation of religion and the public square, that went to war with us on terms familiar to us. Exactly like the middle east.Mr. Perfect wrote: I don't know, it worked pretty well in Japan and Germany, the conventional wisdom is now that it isn't possible in the ME.