Last night Jordan TV had a special live transmission of a public meeting bwteen the Prime Minister and the angry citizens of Zarqa' complaining about prices, jobs and wages (while all the same affirming their attachment to the Hashemite throne). They are all scrambling to position themsleves and try to forestall for the coming tsunami...
For the last ten days, Saudi newspapers have been obsessively relaying speeches of Saudi Minister of Labor Adel al Faqih and reporting on all his (suddenly revealed) new economic plans and policies that he alleges will solve the problems of rising unemployment, inflation, and poverty. Al Faqih went so far as to promise to eradicate all restrictions on women’s employment, something he later had to rescind due to opposition from many sectors of society.
Riyadh feels a little less stale since the Tunisian people toppled their dictator-president Zine El Abidine Bin Ali on January 15, 2011. In cafes, restaurants, and salons (majalis), friends and colleagues greet me with a smug smile, congratulations, and a ‘u’balna kulna (may we all be next). On my daily afternoon walks, I overhear Saudis of all ages and walks of life analyzing the events that led to the overthrow of the Tunisian regime. Everywhere I go, people are hypothesizing on whether the same could happen to “them,” referring to the possibility of a Saudi Arabia not headed by the Al Sauds. Although most concur that it is highly unlikely, they are nonetheless more convinced than ever of the power of the people to bring about change. They know that they can no longer sit back and wait for their government to hand them their basic political, economic and to some extent, even human rights.
It is not surprising that Saudis are jumping on the bandwagon of optimism which has swept the Arab world in the last two weeks. That they are expressing their discontent and criticism of the Saudi government in public spaces, however, is. Last week, several “gatherings” (tajamu’at) took place at government institutions in several Saudi cities. Groups of 70-100 Saudi men (no exact numbers are available) peacefully stood in front of different municipalities as well as the ministries of Education and Labor. The men were silently protesting their deteriorating living conditions, rising unemployment (in one of the strongest economies in the world), and increasingly corrupt and stagnant bureaucracy. These public protests have received little press coverage, but the fact that they have occurred for several days speaks volumes as to the increasing willingness of Saudi citizens to challenge the Saudi regime.
At the Ministry of Labor, the protesters demanded solutions to the discrimination against Saudi nationals in the hiring practices of private companies and called for the serious implementation of Saudification in the private sector. Begun in the mid-1990s, Saudification is a policy that aims to increase the numbers of Saudi men and women in the workforce. By law, private sector companies are required to hire 30% (2006) of their employees from the Saudi labor market. Most, however, have found legal loopholes to evade this law and continue to have very few Saudis on board, and mostly in low-paying jobs. Saudi Arabia today has a 15-20% unemployment rate yet it is host to 8-9 million foreign employees. At the protests in front of the Ministry of Education, Saudi teachers demanded their long-awaited raises, salaries that matched their grade qualifications, and a freeze on the closing of educational programs. Finally, those who gathered at the municipalities were tired of years of waiting for their land grants to be processed and demanded more efficient case processing and communication. In all three instances, the Saudi men (always men) called for transparency and accountability in dealing with their cases and an end to the very pervasive problem of wasta (favoritism and nepotism) within the Saudi Arabian private and public sectors.
The Saudi government prohibits all public gatherings and punishes them by lashings and a prison term that ranges from several months to two years. Saudi media outlets usually report on public gatherings in ways that focus on their consequences in order to deter further acts of protestation. In the last few days, Saudi media have reported on two of the four Saudi nationals who have burned themselves in the Eastern and Southern regions of the Kingdom in protest of economic and political corruption. However, they have remained largely silent on last week’s “gatherings.” But if the past 10 days of government-controlled Saudi media is any indication, the Al Saud regime is very nervous. So far, the ruling members of Al Saud have issued different excuses for hosting Bin Ali despite the continued protestation of Saudi citizens and citizens of other Arab states. In the beginning, newspapers justified hosting Bin Ali by stressing the Kingdom’s long tradition of hospitality, claiming that the government is obligated to welcome everyone (completely evading the fact that Saudi Arabia has the strictest travel requirements in the world). When that was not enough, Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal added that during his tenure in Saudi Arabia, Bin Ali would not be allowed to partake in any political or other activities that could harm the Tunisian people. This part of his speech was repeatedly aired on local Saudi channels for days. More recently, the government announced that they hosted Bin Ali to spare the Tunisian people further harm and violence. In other words, by agreeing to welcome him in the Royal Guest Palace in Jeddah, they saved the Tunisian people from their dictator. The irony of this narrative has not escaped most Saudis, who continue to be ashamed of their authoritarian government’s unabashed support for one of the most brutal oppressors in the region.
For the last ten days, Saudi newspapers have been obsessively relaying speeches of Saudi Minister of Labor Adel al Faqih and reporting on all his (suddenly revealed) new economic plans and policies that he alleges will solve the problems of rising unemployment, inflation, and poverty. Al Faqih went so far as to promise to eradicate all restrictions on women’s employment, something he later had to rescind due to opposition from many sectors of society. His speeches were full of promises of reform and change that he claimed will actually improve the lives of all Saudis. King Abdullah’s New York speech last week was even more inflated. In it, he referred to the Saudi people as his bloodline, again positing himself as the benevolent father of the nation. (See my previous "It's Not The Morality Police, Stupid" www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/466/it%E2%80%99s-not-the-morality-police-stupid). In this role, he comforted his children that he will return home soon to serve them. In what sounded more like satire, King Abdullah promised prosperity, development, gender equality and peace, all reforms that will, this time, really touch the lives of all Saudis. The government’s performance of these empty promises, which are too little, too late, must and will become more amplified as more Saudis join silent protests, write critical opinion editorials, immolate themselves, and proudly watch as days of public anger spread from Tunis, to Amman, to Cairo.
The ruling members of the Al Saud are not concerned with being overthrown anytime soon, although the fact that these acts of opposition coincide with internal family struggles over succession is slightly inconvenient. That said, the Al Sauds are extremely allergic to any kind of public criticism and action against their rule, persons, or what they consider to be their country. They would rather deal with such incidents on an individual basis and behind closed doors, mainly through coercion. The ruling members often convey this stance through the media they control tightly. In the last few days, there have been several articles on the “open door policy” of the ruling family, what many “experts” in the US refer to as “Saudi democracy”. It is true that many of the top ruling members of the Al Saud family receive people in their offices (diwans) on a daily basis, listen to their complaints and in many cases, provide financial or moral support. But for the most part, only those who already have some connections (wasta) can actually make it to these royal diwans. The remaining 20 million Saudis, clearly, cannot access this avenue of “democracy”. The government has also resorted to other means to deter Saudi citizens from organizing protests. Local talk shows, for example, have hosted several prominent Saudi sociologists from the King Saud University in Riyadh, all of whom spoke against the “phenomenon of gatherings,” denigrating it as uncivilized, negative, and above all, illegal. These experts posed public gatherings as even more of an affront in light of the fact that the government has a so-called “open door” policy that in reality is very much tightly shut in the face of those who need it.
If the comments section of every Saudi newspaper is any indication, average Saudi men and women are angry and are becoming increasingly outspoken about their grievances. In the last two weeks alone, citizens have been posting comments that are directly and sharply critical of the Saudi government, its corruption, theft, and control of political and economic resources. Most of the latest comments reference the Tunisian revolution and the importance of people fighting for their own rights. The groundbreaking events in Tunis and Egypt have empowered many in Saudi Arabia, such as the brave men who protested at the government ministries and municipalities. Or those who have called for a major demonstration in Jeddah today and a total strike there next week to protest the corruption that has led to the flooding of the city for the second year in a row. Saudi Arabia might be far from having its own “day of anger,” let alone a revolution, but it takes so much less to trigger the anxieties of the Saudi dictators.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
أحمد فؤاد نجم سفيرا لفقراء العالم في المنطقة العربية : من الارشيف
اختارت المجموعة العربية في النداء العالمي من أجل مكافحة الفقر الشاعر الشعبي المصري أحمد فؤاد نجم سفيرا للفقراء في العالم إلى جانب رئيس جنوب أفريقيا السابق نلسون مانديلا، ليصبح الناطق في المحافل الدولية باسم فقراء العالم العربي
وقال ربيع وهبة ممثل المجموعة العربية إن "الاختيار جاء تقديرا للدورالكبير الذي لعبهالشاعر المصريفي التعبير فنيا عن مصالح الطبقات الشعبية في العالم عبر الخصوصية المصرية والعربية التي تعيشها الطبقات الشعبية فيها".
وأوضح وهبة أن أولى مهام نجم كسفير للفقراء العرب تبدأ بالمشاركة في يوم التعبئة العالمي والوقوف ضد الفقر الذي تعمل شبكة المنظمات العربية غير الحكومية على تنظيمه والاعداد له.
ولفت وهبة إلى أن هذا النشاط يندرج ضمن مخطط منظمة النداء العالمي لإطلاق شهر التحرك خلال شهر أكتوبر/تشرين الأول المقبل لحث الملايين في أنحاء العالم للوقوفلمكافحة الفقر واللامساواة ودعم أهداف الالفية للتنمية البشرية.
وتتزامن هذه المبادرة مع اليوم العالمي لمحاربة الفقر الذي شارك فيه العام الماضي اكثر من 23 مليون شخص.
واشتهر نجم عبر قصائده التي لحنها وآداها الموسيقار والمغني الراحل الشيخ إمام عيسى التي تناقل اشرطتها الشباب العرب.
وكان قد تعرض للاعتقال عدة مرات في الستينات في فترة حكم الرئيس المصري الراحل جمال عبد الناصر وكذلك في السبعينات في عهد الرئيس الراحل أنور السادات نتيجة معارضته للنظام.
وكانت أشعاره المغناة تلعب دورا تحريضيا جماهيريا لرفض هزيمة 1967، كما لعبت دورا مهما في انتفاضة كانون الثاني/ يناير 1977 التي أطلقت عليها المعارضة حينذاك "انتفاضة الخبز".
People Look on as Govts Deny Being the Next Egypt : Jason Ditz
First it was Tunisia. Today it was Egypt, where the government insisted that they absolutely were not the next Tunisia. Clearly, they were wrong. But who is next? There are plenty of bets on that, and plenty of governments insisting that it won’t be them.
The possibilities literally span the entire Muslim world. From Morocco in the far west of Africa to the US-backed government in Pakistan, people are riled up and their rules are insisting that their situations, with an angry population seeking more freedom and less unemployment, is somehow so different from the situation everywhere else that the comparison is ridiculous.
There are some obvious situations, as in Sudan or Yemen, where the opposition to the president-for-life model is pretty straightforward. But even in nations with fairly recent regime changes like Pakistan and Iraq, the hope for change is palpable.
Indeed, there seems to be a sense of jealousy in Baghdad, which saw massive deaths and a US occupation as their path toward regime change, and is now watching Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki consolidate power at an alarming rate. Though analysts say it is unlikely Iraqis will take to the streets (particularly with 50,000 US troops still on hand to prop up Maliki), the resentment is growing.
Even in Iraqi Kurdistan, the “good part” of Iraq, the opposition Gorran Party is calling for resignations and reforms in the regional government, and likening the situation in the region to that in Egypt.
The question “is this Egypt” will be one invariably asked when governments face resentment, and the answer “no” will undoubtedly always be given. But with the world transfixed it seems the reality is that there is at least a little bit of Egypt everywhere.
The possibilities literally span the entire Muslim world. From Morocco in the far west of Africa to the US-backed government in Pakistan, people are riled up and their rules are insisting that their situations, with an angry population seeking more freedom and less unemployment, is somehow so different from the situation everywhere else that the comparison is ridiculous.
There are some obvious situations, as in Sudan or Yemen, where the opposition to the president-for-life model is pretty straightforward. But even in nations with fairly recent regime changes like Pakistan and Iraq, the hope for change is palpable.
Indeed, there seems to be a sense of jealousy in Baghdad, which saw massive deaths and a US occupation as their path toward regime change, and is now watching Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki consolidate power at an alarming rate. Though analysts say it is unlikely Iraqis will take to the streets (particularly with 50,000 US troops still on hand to prop up Maliki), the resentment is growing.
Even in Iraqi Kurdistan, the “good part” of Iraq, the opposition Gorran Party is calling for resignations and reforms in the regional government, and likening the situation in the region to that in Egypt.
The question “is this Egypt” will be one invariably asked when governments face resentment, and the answer “no” will undoubtedly always be given. But with the world transfixed it seems the reality is that there is at least a little bit of Egypt everywhere.
The Egyptian masses won't play ally to Israel : Gideon Levy
Three or four days ago, Egypt was still in our hands. The army of pundits, including our top expert on Egypt, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, said that "everything is under control," that Cairo is not Tunis and that Mubarak is strong. Ben-Eliezer said that he had spoken on the phone with a senior Egyptian official, and he assured him that there's nothing to worry about. You can count on Fuad and Hosni, both about to become has-beens.
On Friday night everything changed. It turned out that the Israeli intelligence estimates, which were recited ad nauseum by the court analysts, were again, shall we say, not the epitome of accuracy. The people of Egypt had their say, and had the nerve not to fall in line with Israeli wishes. A moment before Mubarak's fate is sealed, the time has come for drawing the Israeli conclusions.
Not a plague of darkness in Egypt but the light of the Nile: the end of a regime propped up by bayonets is foretold. It can go on for years, and the downfall sometimes comes at the least expected time, but in the end it will happen. Not only Damascus and Amman, Tripoli and Rabat, Tehran and Pyongyang: Ramallah and Gaza are also destined to be shaken.
The hypocritical and sanctimonious division of countries by the U.S. and the West between the "axis of evil" on the one hand, and the "moderates" on the other, has collapsed. If there is an axis of evil, then it includes all the non-democratic regimes, including the "moderates" and the "stable" and the "pro-Western." Today Egypt, tomorrow Palestine. Yesterday Tunis, tomorrow Gaza.
Not only is the Fatah regime in Ramallah and the Hamas regime in Gaza destined to fall, but perhaps also, one day, the Israeli occupation, which certainly meets all the criteria of criminal tyranny and an evil regime. It too relies only on guns. It too is hated by all levels of the ruled people, even if they stands helpless, unorganized and unequipped, facing a big army. The first conclusion: Better to end it well, with agreements based on justice and not on power, a moment before the masses have their say and succeed in banishing the darkness.
A second, no less important conclusion: Alliances with unpopular regimes can be torn up overnight. As long as the masses in Egypt and in the entire Arab world continue seeing the images of tyranny and violence from the occupied territories, Israel will not be able to be accepted, even it is acceptable to a few regimes.
The Egyptian regime became an ally of the Israeli occupation. The joint siege of Gaza is irrefutable proof of that. The Egyptian people didn't like it. They never liked the peace agreement with Israel, in which Israel committed itself to "respect the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people" but never kept its word. Instead, the people of Egypt got the scenes of Operation Cast Lead.
It is not enough to have a handful of embassies in order to be accepted in the region. There also have to be embassies of goodwill, a just image and a state that is not an occupier. Israel has to make its way into the hearts of the Arab peoples, who will never agree to the continued repression of their brothers, even if their intelligence ministers will continue to cooperate with Israel.
If there's one thing shared by all factions of the Egyptian opposition, it is their seething hatred of Israel. Now their representatives will rise to power, and Israel will find itself in a difficult situation. Neither will anything remain of the virtual achievement that Netanyahu often paraded - the alliance with the "moderate" Arab regimes against Iran. A real alliance with Egypt and its sister-states can only be based on the end of the occupation, as desired by the Egyptian people, and not on a common enemy, as an interest of its regime.
The masses of the Egyptian people - please note: on all levels - took their fate in their hands. There is something impressive and cheering in that. No power, not even that of Mubarak, who Ben-Eliezer likes so much, can overcome them. In Washington the gravity of the moment has already been understood, and they were quick to dissociate from Mubarak and tried to find favor in the eyes of his people. That should happen at some point in Jerusalem.
On Friday night everything changed. It turned out that the Israeli intelligence estimates, which were recited ad nauseum by the court analysts, were again, shall we say, not the epitome of accuracy. The people of Egypt had their say, and had the nerve not to fall in line with Israeli wishes. A moment before Mubarak's fate is sealed, the time has come for drawing the Israeli conclusions.
Not a plague of darkness in Egypt but the light of the Nile: the end of a regime propped up by bayonets is foretold. It can go on for years, and the downfall sometimes comes at the least expected time, but in the end it will happen. Not only Damascus and Amman, Tripoli and Rabat, Tehran and Pyongyang: Ramallah and Gaza are also destined to be shaken.
The hypocritical and sanctimonious division of countries by the U.S. and the West between the "axis of evil" on the one hand, and the "moderates" on the other, has collapsed. If there is an axis of evil, then it includes all the non-democratic regimes, including the "moderates" and the "stable" and the "pro-Western." Today Egypt, tomorrow Palestine. Yesterday Tunis, tomorrow Gaza.
Not only is the Fatah regime in Ramallah and the Hamas regime in Gaza destined to fall, but perhaps also, one day, the Israeli occupation, which certainly meets all the criteria of criminal tyranny and an evil regime. It too relies only on guns. It too is hated by all levels of the ruled people, even if they stands helpless, unorganized and unequipped, facing a big army. The first conclusion: Better to end it well, with agreements based on justice and not on power, a moment before the masses have their say and succeed in banishing the darkness.
A second, no less important conclusion: Alliances with unpopular regimes can be torn up overnight. As long as the masses in Egypt and in the entire Arab world continue seeing the images of tyranny and violence from the occupied territories, Israel will not be able to be accepted, even it is acceptable to a few regimes.
The Egyptian regime became an ally of the Israeli occupation. The joint siege of Gaza is irrefutable proof of that. The Egyptian people didn't like it. They never liked the peace agreement with Israel, in which Israel committed itself to "respect the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people" but never kept its word. Instead, the people of Egypt got the scenes of Operation Cast Lead.
It is not enough to have a handful of embassies in order to be accepted in the region. There also have to be embassies of goodwill, a just image and a state that is not an occupier. Israel has to make its way into the hearts of the Arab peoples, who will never agree to the continued repression of their brothers, even if their intelligence ministers will continue to cooperate with Israel.
If there's one thing shared by all factions of the Egyptian opposition, it is their seething hatred of Israel. Now their representatives will rise to power, and Israel will find itself in a difficult situation. Neither will anything remain of the virtual achievement that Netanyahu often paraded - the alliance with the "moderate" Arab regimes against Iran. A real alliance with Egypt and its sister-states can only be based on the end of the occupation, as desired by the Egyptian people, and not on a common enemy, as an interest of its regime.
The masses of the Egyptian people - please note: on all levels - took their fate in their hands. There is something impressive and cheering in that. No power, not even that of Mubarak, who Ben-Eliezer likes so much, can overcome them. In Washington the gravity of the moment has already been understood, and they were quick to dissociate from Mubarak and tried to find favor in the eyes of his people. That should happen at some point in Jerusalem.
ما هذا الضجيج حول حائط البراق وملكيته
ما هذا الضجيج حول حائط البراق وملكيته
بقلم د. عدنان توفيق عبد الرازق
أثار رئيس وزراء اسرائيل بنيامين نتنياهو قبل عدة ايام ضجيجآ حول وثيقة كتبها السيد المتوكل طه نائب وزير الاعلام في السلطة الوطنية حول حائط البراق والذي يعتبره اليهود الجائط الغربي لهيكلهم التاريخي ويسمونه "هاكوتل". وطالب رئيس الوزراء الاسرائيلي قادة السلطة الفلسطينية نبذ هذه الوثيقة والتنديد بها "والكف عن انكار الحقائق التاريخية".
ولكي لا ننجرف وراء محاولات نتنياهو اسقاط اللوم لتعثر مفاوضات السلام على الجانب الفلسطيني للمفاوضات وخلق الذرائع مكشوفة النوايا للهروب من التزامات اسرائيل الدولية بخصوص شروط الاستمرار بهذه المفاوضات – من الضروري القاء الضوء على موضوع حائط البراق واستغلال الحكومات الاسرائيلية المتعاقبة لعواطف ووجدان ليس فقط اليهود بل الكثير من غير اليهود اللذين يرفضوا استعمال الدين لاغراض سياسية.
هناك اربعة مواضيع جوهرية يجب طرحها لكي نصل الى حقائق جوهرية موضوعية بخصوص هوية وملكية حائط البراق بعيدآ عن الخطاب الديني من جهه والتصريحات السياسية والاعلامية من جهه اخرى مع قناعتي بان الضجيج اليهودي/الاسرائيلي حول حائط البراق ومنذ زمن بعيد هو بالاساس ذات اهداف سياسية.
وهذه المواضيع الاربعة هي اولآ اشكالية التواصل اليهودي بالمدينة وثانيآ الصلة اليهودية الدينية بأثار الهيكل
وثالثآ موقع الحائط الغربي للهيكل واخيرآ ملكية وتبعية الحائط وما حوله.
اشكالية التواصل اليهودي بالمدينة
تشير الكتابات اليهودية وعيرها بأن نبوخذ نصر ملك بابل قام عام 587 قبل الميلاد بتدمير مدينة القدس وحرق الهيكل اليهودي وسبي 42 ألف يهودي إلى بابل . ولم يسمح لليهود بالعودة إلى فلسطين والقدس حتى عام 519 قبل الميلاد. بعد عودة اليهود إلى القدس المدمره بدءوا ببناء الهيكل من جديد عام 517 ق.م والذي اعتبر الهيكل الثاني وتم توسيعه على يد الملك هيرود في الأعوام 17-19 بعد الميلاد واستمر ذلك بعد موت هيرود وحتى عام 64 بعد الميلاد . لم تستمر أيام هذا الهيكل طويلاً ففي آب عام 70 ب.م . قام القائد الروماني طيطس بدخول القدس بعد تمرد اليهود فيها ودمر كل أبنيتها بما في ذلك الهيكل الثاني وحَول المدينة إلى ركام من الأبنية المدمرة وأقام على هذه الأنقاض ثكنات عسكرية ومنع اليهود من دخول المدينة وما حولها حتى القرن السابع ب.م اي لأكثر من 500عام .
يقول الباحث الاسرائيلي يورم تسفرير في مقاله (هدم جبل الهيكل) بانه بعد دخول طيطس تم الهدم التام للمدينة بعد ثلاثة ايام من المعارك القاسية وقام ايضآ حتى بعد سقوط المدينة وتحويلها الى رماد بالاستمرار بالهدم المبرمج لحائط المدينة وبناياتها باستثناء جزء من الحائط الغربي القريب من القلاع والتي تم حفظه لاستعماله كمركز لجيشه.
بعد هذا الخراب وعودة بعض اليهود الى المدينة ومحاولتهم البناء من جديد . وفي ا لاعوام 132-135 ميلادي قام اليهود بتمرد جديد خلال حكم الامبراطور هادريا . وقاد هذا التمرد باركوخبا ولكن لم يكن ذلك في القدس ولا توجد ادله على ان باركوخبا دخل القدس وادار تمرده هناك . لقد استمرت هذه الحرب ضد التمرد اليهودي (بار كوخبا) ثلاث سنوات ونصف حيث قتل اليهود بالجملة وسبي عدة آلاف منهم وتحولوا الى عبيد للامبرطورية . وتم تدمير كل المستوطنات اليهودية حول القدس وانتقل المركز اليهودي الى الجليل وامر الامبراطور بمنع ممارسة اليهودية وبمعاقبة العاصين بالموت وغير اسم المقاطعة من اوديا الى سوريا – فلسطينة وغير اسم المدينة الى " اليا كاباتولينا" . وامر بطرد اليهود من القدس وضواحيها ولم يسمح لهم حتى بزيارتها.
يشير تسفرير بانه في عهد البيزنطينيين كانت هناك محاولات شبه خفية لعودة اليهود الى الهيكل ولكن دون نجاح. كذلك كانت لهم محاولات وطلبات للعودة والصلاة هناك خصوصاً في المناسبات الدينية وبالذات يوم التاسع من آب (التقويم العبري) وهو ذكرى خراب الهيكل . ويقول الكاتب بانه خلال القرن السادس ميلادي استمر سن القوانين المعادية لليهود وان الضغوط على اليهود في فلسطين واماكن اخرى كانت مستمرةً وخصوصاً ضد السامريين . وكان تمرد السامرين ضد البيزنطيين قد لقي فشله خلال نهاية القرن الخامس وبداية القرن السادس .غير انه ليس هناك ذكر لمحاولة تمرد اليهود ضد البيزنطيين في مصادر تاريخية اخرى.
أما بالنسبة الى العهد البيزنطي يذكر الباحث الاسرائيلي زئيب روبين بانه في عام 324 ميلادي اعتلى الحكم الروماني الامبراطور قوسطنطينوس جيث جعل مدينة بيزنطيون (قسطنطينو بولس) على ضفاف البسفورعاصمة الامبراطورية وجعل المسيحية دين الامبرطورية بما في ذلك القدس – مدينة المسيح . لا تشير المصادر اليهودية الى اي معالم او تحرك حضري يهودي في المدينة في تلك المرحلة حيث استمر منعهم من دخول المدينة
اما بالنسبة للقرن السابع الميلادي يقول الباحث كان هناك نزاع وحروب ضارية بين الامبراطورية الرومانية الشرقية ومملكة فارس وفي السنة الرابعة للحرب بين الطرفين التي بدات عام 600 احتل الفرس القدس بقيادة القائد شاهر براز بعد محاصرتها 20 يوماً . تشير المصادر لتلك الحقبة بان اليهود قاموا بمؤازرة الفرس طمعاً باعادة مقامهم في القدس وللسماح لهم بالعودة للاستيطان في المدينة وشاركوا في المذابح ضد المسيحيين ويشير المؤرخ سطرتغيوس بان اليهود استمروا بذبح المسيحيين حتى عندما كل الفرس من القيام به . يقول الباحث روبين بان لهذه الرواية جذور رغم المبالغة فيها حيث خضع اليهود على امتداد اجيال الى الاهانة والمطاردة من قبل المسيحيين .
وعندما دخل الروماني هراكلوس القدس عام 629 قام رجاله بقتل العديد من اليهود الذين تواجدوا حول القدس وبالجليل وطردوا من القدس ومنع اقترابهم من المدينة لبعد ثلاث اميال . من هنا فان المحاولة لتجديد الوجود والسيطرة اليهودية في القدس ايام الحكم الفارسي قضت على اخر احلامهم لاعادة يهودية المدينة.
وفي عام 638 ب.م جاء العهد الإسلامي حيث فتحت القدس في عهد الخليفة عمر بن الخطاب (رضي الله عنه) وأعيد بناؤها من جديد بما في ذلك باحة الحرم الشريف، وبناء المسجد الأقصى. وخلال السيطرة الاسلامية في مراحلها المختلفة ولغاية انتهاء الحكم العثماني على القدس عام 1917 سمح لليهود باقامة مساكنهم وبناء كنسهم ومدارسهم الدينية فيها.
يقول الكاتب اليهودي أليك اسحاق في نشرة للوكالة اليهودية انه "عندما نلقي نظرة من القرن العشرين الى الحروب الصليبية لا بد ان تلاحظ الفرق بين الصليبيين وبين صلاح الدين. فبينما قام الصليبيون عام 1099م بتدمير المدينة وحرق الكنيس والسكان اليهود والمسلمين قام الايوبيين باحتلال القدس بشكل مختلف حيث لم يقم بمذابح وسمح بحرية العبادة لليهود والمسيحيين واعطى الامان لمن اراد البقاء في القدس والحماية لمن اراد ان يرحل عنها".... "وخلال القرنيين الثاني والثالث عشر بدأت الجالية اليهودية في القدس بالانتعاش وكان ذلك نتيجة التسامح الاسلامي مع اصحاب الديانات السماويه – اليهود والمسيحيين – واعتبارهم اصحاب ذمه واعطاءهم الامتيازات المناسبة . فبينما اعتبرت المسيحية انها البديل لليهودية وتتناقض معها وان الله فضل المسيحيين ورفض اليهود.آمن المسلمون بان التوحيد والرساله الاسلامية هي انسانية شموليه وتستطيع استيعاب المسيحية واليهودية وتترك لهم الخيار بالممارسات الدينية" .
الصلة اليهودية الدينية بآثار الهيكل
تشير الانسكلوبيديا "جودايكا" بانه منذ خراب الهيكل وسقوط ثورة بار كوخبا عام 132 م يصلي اليهود في البلاد وفي المهجر باتجاه الهكل المهدوم. وتشير مصادر "المدراش" في تلك الفترة الى الحائط الغربي "لقدس الاقداس" والذي حسب التقاليد اليهودية لم تتركه "الشخينه" (اي الروح الالهيه ) وحيث ان الهيكل قد هدم فتبقى الشخينه متصلة بالحائط المتبقي. ورغم ذكر اليهود للمكان المقدس الا ان الحائط الغربي لم يذكر في كتاباتهم لغاية لوائح "احماز بن بالتئيل" عام 1050 ميلادي وكذالك ذكره بنجامين من توديلا في القرن الثاني عشر وقرنه بباب الرحمة والواقع في الحائط الشرقي لساحة الحرم الشريف. وتشير جودايكا بان اسم الحائط الغربي بدأ بالتواجد في التراث اليهودي حوالي عام 1520 ميلادي اما أثر هجرة اليهود من اسبانيا واما بعد سيطرة العثمانيين على القدس عام 1517. وحسب التقاليد اليهودية كما نقلها موزس حافتص كان ذالك السلطان سليم (والد سليمان القانوني) الذي اكتشف هذا الحائط (اي حائط البراق) وسمح لليهود ان ينتقلوا بصلاواتهم من الحائط الشرقي الى الحائط الغربي.
أما الانسكلوبيديا البريطانية حول الحائط الغربي / الانسكلوبيديا اليهودية فتؤكد بان اهمية حائط البراق والمنسوب الى حائط المبكى ظهرت حديثاً فخلال فترة الحكماء اليهود (Geonim) في الاعوام 589 – 1038م كان جبل الزيتون المكان المفضل لتجمع اليهود . صحيح ان بنيامين تودلا ذكر الحائط الغربي في القرن الثاني عشر غير ان هذا الحائط لم يذكر من قبل عشرات الزوار والحجاج للقدس في القرون الوسطى . لقد بدأ ذكر هذا الحائط كمكان مقدس وهام لليهود فقط بعد قدوم العثمانيين الى القدس عام 1517 . ويذكر هذا المصدر بان اهمية هذا المكان ازدادت لدى اليهود لقربه من الوجود اليهودي في القدس ولسهولة الوصول اليه . وهكذا بدأ اليهود يهتمون بالمكان واعطوه صفة المعالم التاريخية لهم كما جاء في تراثهم واصبح يذكر في كتبهم وكتاباتهم ليس في القدس فحسب بل في انحاء التواجد اليهودي. ومع انتهاء القرن التاسع عشر اصبح الحائط رمزاً للوجود اليهودي ولاطماعهم الوطنية .
ويستشهد المصدر بتأكيد الباحثة كارين ارمسترونغ Jewish heritage , Jerusalem)) بانه لغاية عهد المماليك وفي القرن الخامس عشر كان اليهود يصلون مقابل جبل الزيتون ولقد سمح لهم المماليك حفاظاً على امنهم ان يصلوا قرب الحائط الغربي وحسب تقديرها لم يزد عدد السكان اليهود انذاك عن 70 اسره . وعنما جاء العثمانيون وتقلدوا زمام الحكم بعد المماليك في القدس سمح سليمان القانوني في القرن السادس عشر لليهود ان ييسكنوا في القدس وزاد عددهم الى حوالي 1600 نسمة من مجموع 13300نسمة . وتقول ارمسترونغ انه رغم محاولة الكهنة اليهود ابقاء القدس في ذاكره اليهود بعد خراب الهيكل الا ان ملايين اليهود الذي سكنوا في انحاء الامبروطورية الرومانية لم يكن لهم صلة بالقدس ولم يكن لخراب الهيكل أثر على حياتهم اليومية .
يشير المؤرخ الجغرافي الإسرائيلي يهوشوع بن أريي على ان قدرة اليهود للوصول إلى حائط البراق، وحصولهم على إذن للصلاة هناك وأعداد المصلين تغيرت وتقلبت دوما خلال القرن التاسع عشر. ولكي يثبت هذا الاستنتاج قدم بن أري عدة شهادات لرجال الدين وأكدوا أو شهدوا هذه التغيرات. يشهد "سيتزن " رحالة ألماني لدى زيارته للقدس عام 1806 أن اليهود لم يتمكنوا من زيارة المبكى إلا بإذن من السلطات (العثمانية). ولكن هناك تسجيلات للجالية الشرقية اليهودية (سفراديم) تشير بان اليهود قاموا بتنظيف رصيف المبكى عام 1768 وكذلك عام 1812 وعام 1815 . ويقول الراهب البريطاني روبنسون بعد أن زار القدس خلال الحكم المصري لفلسطيني وللشام بأنه أذن لليهود الاقتراب من مكان هيكلهم والصلاة والبكاء على باقي أنقاظه وهو حائط في منطقة ضيقه محاطة بحيطان . عندما عاد العثمانيين إلى القدس بعد طرد المصريين لم يمنع اليهود من زيارة الحائط ولكن عندما طلب اليهود تبليط أرضية رصيف الحائط عام 1840 رفُض طلبهم على اعتبار أن هذا الرصيف تابع إلى وقف أبو مدين (حارة المغاربة ) وهو وقف إسلامي غير انه سمح لهم بالاستمرار بزيارة الحائط . ويذكر المؤرخ البريطاني "سيتورت " بعد زيارة للقدس عام 1854 بان اليهود قاموا برصف الرصيف المحاذي لحائط البراق بعد أن أُذن لهم من قبل الحكم العثماني وصرح أنذاك الثري اليهودي مونتفيوري لزعامة اليهود في بريطانيا بأنه حصل على فرمان عثماني يسمح لليهود إقامة مظلة فوق رصيف الحائط .
موقع الحائط الغربي للهيكل
يشير الباحثه دولفن وكولن بان هناك نظريات اسرائيلية متضاربة حول مكان الهيكل في القدس ولكن هناك مؤخراً ثلاث نظريات رئيسية يتم الجدل حولها والبحث فيها لايجاد الادلة المفقودة. غير ان هناك مجموعات يهودية متذمتة تريد تحديد المكان من اجل بناء الهيكل الثالث عندما تسمح بذلك الظروف السياسية . وهذه النظريات الثلاث هي :-
1. المكان الحالي لمسجد قبة الصخرة. وهذا المكان هو المكان التقليدي المتداول بين الباحثين اليهود.
2. بناءاً على اقتراح عالم الفيزياء (اشر قاوفمان ) فإن الهيكل كان يقع شمال مسجد قبة الصخرة.
3. ويقترح ( طوبيا ساجف) مهندس معماري من تل ابيب ان الهيكل كان يقع في الجنوب من مسجد قبة الصخرة ويدعي ان لديه الادلة الكثيرة التي تشير الى هذه النظرية .
نظرية الموقع الجنوبي :
جائت هذه النظرية بخلاف الاعتقاد التقليدي لوجود الهيكل مكان قبة الصخرة. من هنا فان الكثير من معتقدي المكان التقليدي تفاجئوا عندما جائت هذه النظرية خصوصآ على لسان المهندس الاسرائيلي طوبيا ساجف بتفاصيل تفند النظريات التقليدية وتطرح بديلا نسبياً جديد. يشير طوبيا بان حصن انطونيا وقع غالباً مكان قبة الصخرة اي ان الهيكل لا يمكن ان يكون هناك حيث كان هذا موقع الجيش الذي قام بهدم الهيكل الى الجنوب . ويشير ايضاً ان جنوب حصن انطونيا كان هناك مستنقع او حفرة مياه واقية لحصن تفصله عن جبل الهيكل .
هناك ايضاً موضوع بوابة "حولده" (الباب الثلاثي) والذي يعتقد بانه كان المدخل الرئيسي الجنوبي للهيكل . يقول طوبيا بانه حسب " المشناه" هناك تقريباً عشرة امتار فارق بالارتفاع بين بوابة الحولده وبين الهيكل وكذلك هناك 39 متر تفصل بين مدخل الهيكل ومستوى الهيكل نفسه . ان هذه الابعاد لا يمكن لها ان تكون مواصفات ابعاد قبة الصخرة حيث نظرية الصخرة تتطلب 20 متراً ارتفاع و 80 متراً فاصل ، اي ان الرؤيا من باب الخليل المطلة على الهيكل وعلى مركزه كان يجب ان تكون بارتفاع 75 لكي ترى الهيكل لو وقع مكان قبة الصخرة وهذا الارتفاع لم يكن ممكن من هنا فان رؤية الهيكل من ذلك الموقع تشير بان الهيكل كان من الجنوب من منطقة قبة الصخرة . هناك ايضاً اشارة الى تزويد الهيكل بالمياه الجارية التي كانت تأتي من جبال الخليل ومن خلال برك سليمان وبقنوات الى مستوى الهيكل لاستعمالها لطهارة الرهبان ، تشير الدراسات الميدانية بانه لم يكن يمكن لهذه القنوات ان تصل الماء الى الهيكل لو كان مكانه فوق قبة الصخرة وبفارق من 20 م الى الاسفل اي الى الجنوب .
اما الباحث الامريكي ارنست مارتن فلخص ابحاثه في كتاب مفصل يثبت فيه بان حائط البراق هو ليس الحائط الغربي لهيكل سليمان ولقدس الاقداس وان حائط الهيكل وكل الهياكل يقع الى الجنوب الشرقي للمسجد الاقصى بقرب ينابيع مياه سلوان الملقبة بالجيحون. ويدور كتابه حول موقع الهيكل او "مجموعة من الهياكل " اي اكثر من الهيكل الاول والثاني وكذلك هيكل هيرود والذين بنيوا حسب بحثه في اماكن مختلفة من القدس التاريخية ولكن ليس على باحة الحرم الشريف كما يدعي البعض "خصوصاً الباحثين الصهاينة".
ويؤكد الكاتب ان اسرائيل زمن الهيكل كانت تقترب الى الرب من الشرق وليس من الغرب كما يدعون الآن، وان نظريتهم الحالية بعيده عن الصحة لان حائط المبكى الحالي هو الحائط الخارجي للحرم وليس له علاقة بالحائط الغربي لقدس الاقداس . فان اسوار الحرم كانت جزء من حصن انطونيا وان الاسوار الاربعة للحرم ليس لها علاقة بهيكل هيرود . هناك حائط غربي فعلا موجود في الموقع السابق للهيكل وان بقاياه مدمرة ومبعثرة ولكن يمكن معرفتها في بعض المواقع . ويستشهد الكاتب بيهودا ناديش في كتابة "اساطير يهودية" والذي يعلق على المغالطة بين حائط الهيكل وسور الحرم الشريف ويؤكد ان الحائط الغربي الحالي لم يكن له علاقة بقدس الاقداس .
هناك ايضاً موضوع بوابة الرهبان والتي ذكرها اليهود في القرن الخامس وكانت في الجزء الجنوبي قرب نبع جيحون . ومن الملاحظ ان بوابة الرهبان لم تذكر في اي سجل تاريخي بالنسبة للهياكل من هيرود وحتى سليمان القانوني . بوابة الرهبان كانت بوابة جديده سمع عنها في سجلات يهودية في زمن البيزنطيين وذكرت عدة مرات كبقعة جغرافية في وثائق جنيزه التي تحدثت عن امور يهودية في القدس من سنة 638 وحتى 1099 ميلادي. ويستشهد الكاتب بالباحث السرائيلي موشي غيل والذي كتب بانه لا توجد اشارة في "المشنه" الى بوابة الرهبان ولا في "الميدوت" التي تقدم توضيحاً للهيكل ولجبل الهيكل او في اي رسالة اخرى . ويقول غيل هناك تفسير قسطنطيني يعود الى الفترة البيزنطية يتحدث عن بوابة الرهبان .
ويعلق مارتن ويقول بان غيل يؤكد بان الحي اليهودي الواقع جنوب وجنوب شرقي القدس كان مجاوراً لبوابة الرهبان وعاشت فئة الربانيين من اليهود قرب والى جانب بوابة الرهبان بينما عاش القراءون اليهود الى الشرق والجنوب . ويستنتج بقوله بما ان اليهود كانوا يعبدون الاله بمواجهتمهم له – فقد وقفوا امامه في الناحية الشرقية لقدس الاقداس ( او الى شرق هذا : بوابة الرهبان ) ثم ان بقايا الحائط الغربي كانت تقع غرب بوابة الرهبان وان "الشخينه" (الروح الالهية) كانت عبر الحائط لذا عبد اليهود الاله من الناحية الشرقية للحائط وليس من الجانب الغربي . ويؤكد الكاتب ان تسمية بوابة الرهبان تعود الى قسطنطين / جوليان في القرن الرابع . المهم في الامر ان الدراسات تشير بان بوابة الرهبان مذكورة عدة مرات في رسائل جنيزه بانها تقع قرب الحي اليهودي في الجزء الجنوبي الشرقي من المدينة . كانت بوابة الرهبان جزءاً من الحائط الغربي الباقي من قدس الاقداس من هيكل قسطنطين / جوليان ولم تكن ابداً جزءا من الحائط الغربي الخارجي للحرم الشريف – حيث يحاول معظم الباحثين اليهود وضعها هناك اليوم .
حائط البراق ملكية اسلامية غير متنازع عليها
بعد طرد الصليبيين من القدس واستتباب السيطرة الاسلامية على المدينة اصدر الافضل ابن الفاتح صلاح الدين الايوبي فتوى عام 1193 اعتبر الأرض المحيطة بحائط البراق وقف إسلامي على اسم شعيب أبو مدين لصالح الحجاج المغاربة الذين بنوا واستوطنوا فيها. لقد تم بناء بيوت حارة المغاربة 4 أمتار بعيداً عن حائط البراق. وفي عهد السلطان سليمان بني سور القدس المعروف لنا اليوم ولما اكتشف السلطان معالم حائط البراق (حوالي عام 1540) طلب من مهندسة سنان ترميم المكان. وفي النصف الثاني للقرن السادس عشر سمح السلطان سليمان لليهود بالصلاة بمحاذاة هذا الحائط. وخلال العقود التالية تم اعمار المنطقة المحيطة بالحائط وأصبح الدخول إلى هذه المنطقة من خلال ممر ضيق عبر حارة المغاربة.
أما بالنسبة للخلافات الإسلامية اليهودية حول كيفية الصلاة أمام حائط البراق (المبكى) والترتيبات المسموح بها فوصلت أوجها في عام 1928 عندما تعارك اليهود مع الشرطة الانجليزية التي منعت اليهود إحضار ستائر لتفصل بين الرجال والنساء وتبعها المعركة الدموية التي جرت انذاك بين اليهود والمسلمين وآدت بحياة المئات من الطرفين مما حث حكومة المملكة المتحدة – بريطانيا إلى تكليف لجنة ملكية خاصة بمقام الحائط وشروط صلاة اليهود أمامه سميت باللجنة الملكية.
اشارت هذه اللجنة في تقريرها الذي نشر عام 1930 إن امتداد المنطقة المتنازع عليها 30 متر على طول الحائط الخارجي للبراق وان أمام (محاذات) هذا الحائط هناك رصيف ممتد ومدخله الوحيد من الجهة الشمالية لزقاق متصل بشارع الملك داوود. اما من الجهة الجنوبية فهناك حائط مغلق متصل ببعض البيوت الاسلامية وجامع البراق. وفي عام 1929 أقيمت بوابه لتمكين السكان ورواد الجامع المرور من خلاله.
واشارت اللجنة بأن المساحة الملتصقة بحائط البراق (المبكى ) تعتبر وقف إسلامي أمر به الملك أفضل ابن صلاح الدين الأيوبي. وحول عام "1320". اعتبرت البيوت الملتصقة بالساحة العتيقة المحاذية لحائط البراق وقف لأبو مدين واسمها حارة المغاربة حيث أوقفت للحجاج القادمين من المغرب.
وخلال مناقشة الأبعاد المختلفة للخلاف الإسلامي - اليهودي حول حائط البراق استشهدت اللجنة الملكية بعدة مصادر بريطانية ورسمية أخرى من أهمها ما قالته لجنة " شو- show" في تقريرها حول المطالب اليهودية فيذكر هذا التقرير أن وعد بلفور كان محرضاً لليهود لتقديم إدعاءات لحقوق غير قائمة أساساً وليس لديهم الأدلة لإثباتها ولكنهم واثقون من التدخل الخارجي لصالحهم وأيضا وصلوا لاستعمال القوة كما فعلوا في ساحة البراق عام 1929 (صفحة 73).
هناك أيضا تصريحات أدرجت في ما يسمى "white paper" في تشرين ثاني 1928 بما في ذلك تأكيد كون الحائط قانونياً مُلك للمسلمين وان الرصيف أمامه وقف إسلامي ورغم أن لليهود صلة دينية وثيقة بالحائط إلا أن الإدارة البريطانية تؤيد المطلب الإسلامي بإلزام اليهود عدم إحضار أي علامات تخل بالملكية الإسلامية وان الترتيبات الذكية لهذه الأمور تبقى كما هي عليه وان على سلطة الانتداب إجبار اليهود للانصياع للمطالب الإسلامية بهذا الخصوص .
وخلال التحقيقات التي اجرتها اللجنة المكية قام الكولونيل سيمس من قوى امن الانتداب باعطاء شهادة مطولة منها ما يلي: "كان اليهود معتادون على الذهاب الى الحائط الغربي للبكاء على سقوط عظمة اسرائيل. غير ان هذا المكان تابع للوقف الاسلامي ورغم السماح لهم للذهاب الى هناك لم يكن لليهود الحق القانوني لعمل اي شيء قد يعطي النطباع بأنهم يملكون المكان". "ورغم التعاطف الكبير لادارة الانتداب مع هؤلاء اليهود غير انه من واجبنا الحفاظ على الوضع القائم وعليه عندما حاول اليهود ادخال المقاعد الى باحة البراق اضطرت الشرطة منعهم من ذالك حيث ان تصرفهم لم يكن ضمن حقهم القانوني".
وبناء على نقاشات مطولة حول قدسية الحائط والرصيف من امامه وجهود التوصل إلى توافق بين وجهتي النظر اصدرت اللجنة الملكية حكمها واللذي يتضمن اللتالي:
يعتبر حائط البراق بشكل قاطع ملك للمسلمين وهو جزء لا يتجزأ من باحة الحرم الشريف والتي هي وقف إسلامي غير متنازع عليها . كذلك إن الرصيف المحاذي لحائط البراق هو ملك للمسلمين وكذلك حي المغاربة المتلاصق برصيف حائط البراق والذي يعتبر وقف إسلامي وان جلب بعض الادوات والحاجات المستعملة لاداء الصلاة من قبل المصلين اليهود الى الرصيف لا يمكن استعماله من قبل اليهود كاثبات ملكية للحائط اوالرصيف. ومن الناحية الاخرى يجب ان تكون لليهود امكانية زيارة هذا الحائط لاداء شعائرهم الدينية بشكل حر وفي جميع الاوقات ما عدى الاوقات المتعلقة بترميم المكان. ويمنع المسلمون من إقامة أي مبنى يلغي الرصيف أو يمنع اليهود من التعبد امام الحائط. لا يجوز لليهود احضار مقاعد او سجاد او فرش من اي نوع او ستائر او خيم او حائط مؤقت وذالك بشكل قاطع.
بناء على ما جاء في هذه الابحاث المختصرة يمكننا ان نلخص بما يلي. بخلاف ادعاء بعض الرموز الاسرائيلية لم يكن هناك تواصل تام للوجود اليهودي الجماعي في القدس بعد خراب الهيكل الثاني حيث طردوا وابعدوا عن المدينة حوالي 500 عام على يد الرومان والبيزنطينين وكذالك حوالي مائة عام خلال الحكم الصليبي. لم يكن التواجد اليهودي الجماعي في القدس آمنآ الى تحت راية الحكم الاسلامي منذ بدايتة وبعد تخليص القدس من الصليبيين على يد الفاتح صلاح الدين مرورآ بعهد المماليك بعد حكم الايوبيين ومن ثم خلال الحكم العثماني لغاية نهايته عام 1917 . لقد سمح المسلمون لليهود خلال ما يقارب 1300 عامآ للاقامة في القدس بشكل جماعي واقامة شعائرهم الدينية بشكل آمن بما في ذالك مقابل السور الشرقي ومن ثم في زمن العثمانيين قبالة السور الغربي للحرم الشريف اي حائط البراق.
ومن الجدير بالذكر بأن اعتبار الحائط الغربي للحرم الشريف هو الحائط الغربي للهيكل لهو امر نسبيآ جديد في المعتقدات والكتابات اليهودية ولا يزال رهن البحث.
لقد بدآت الخلافات حول صلاة اليهود قبالة حائط البراق فقط عندما جائت الحركة الصهيونية الى فلسطين وبدأت بتحريض يهود القدس على تحدي الترتيبات القائمة واستفزاز المسلمين بأجرائات جديدة من شأنها التعدي على ملكية حائط البراق وما حوله من اوقاف اسلامية. لقد جائت احكام اللجنة الملكية البريطانية عام 1930 لتؤكد على الملكية الاسلامية المطلقة لحائط البراق وما امامه من باحة وسكن.
أما ما قامت وتقوم به سلطات الحتلال السرائيلي منذ احيلال القدس عام 1967 من توسيع لساحة البراق على حساب هدم حارة المغاربة وتوسيع حارة اليهود اضعاف حجمها التاريخي لهو امر يحتاج الى بحث آخر ولكن يمكن تلخيصه بأنه مناف للقانون الدولي ولقرارات مجلس الامن والجمعية العامة للامم المتحدة والتي تعتبر هذه الممارسات لاغية وليس من شأنها الغاء الملكية الاسلامية لحائط البراق وما من حوله من احياء عربية الملكية.
What has happened in Tunisia, is happening right now in Egypt : Danny Schechter
This is an upstairs/downstairs story that takes us from the peak of a Western mountaintop for the wealthy to spreading mass despair in the valleys of the Third World poor.
Yes, the tens of thousands in the streets demanding the ouster of the cruel Mubarek regime are there now pressing for their right to make a political choice but they are being driven by an economic disaster that has sent unemployment skyrocketing and food prices climbing.
People are out in the streets not just to meet but by their need to eat.
As Nouriel Roubini who was among the first to predict the financial crisis while others were pooh-poohing him as “Dr Doom” says don’t just look at the crowds in Cairo but what is motivating them now, after years of silence and repression.
He says that the dramatic rise in energy and food prices has become a major global threat and a leading factor that has gone largely unreported in the coverage of events in Egypt.
"What has happened in Tunisia, is happening right now in Egypt, but also riots in Morocco, Algeria and Pakistan, are related not only to high unemployment rates and to income and wealth inequality, but also to this very sharp rise in food and commodity prices," Roubini said.
Prices in Egypt are up 17% because of a worldwide surge in commodity prices that has many factors but speculation on Wall Street and big banks is a key one.
As IPS reported, “Wall Street investment firms and banks, along with their kin in London and Europe, were responsible for the technology dot-com bubble, the stock market bubble, and the recent U.S. and UK housing bubbles. They extracted enormous profits and their bonuses before the inevitable collapse of each.
Now they've turned to basic commodities. The result? At a time when there has been no significant change in the global food supply or in food demand, the average cost of buying food shot up 32 percent from June to December 2010, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Nothing but price speculation can explain wheat prices jumping 70 percent from June to December last year when global wheat stocks were stable, experts say.”
Here’s a key fact buried in a CNN Money report—the kind intended for investors, not the public at large: “About 40% of Egypt's citizens live off less than $2 a day, so any price increase hurts.”
Brilliant!
Think about that: what would you be doing if you were living of $2 a day. You won’t be drinking mochachinos at Starbucks, that’s for sure.
Trust me, the people on top are following this unrest closely on Wall Street as anxiety grows:
Reports the Washington Post:
U.S. stocks declined sharply Friday as violent clashes in Egypt injected a jolt of anxiety into global financial markets.
Egypt is central to U.S. interests in the Middle East as a moderate state and a key player in both counterterrorism operations and regional peace negotiations, said Helima L. Croft, a geopolitical analyst at Barclays Capital.
If street protests were to end President Hosni Mubarak's nearly 30-year hold on power, "I think there would be a fear that you could see radicalism sweeping across the Middle East," Croft said, adding that the fear might be unfounded.
Beyond its political significance, Egypt controls the Suez Canal, an important shipping lane.”
Suddenly, there are worries about Egypt being able to pay off its debt, it suddenly was pronounced riskier than Iraq, according to Asia Times:
“The cost of protecting Egyptian debt against default for five years with the contracts jumped 69 basis points, or 0.69 percentage points, this week to 375 today, compared with 328 for Iraq, according to prices from CMA, a data provider in London. Just last week, Iraqi swaps cost 19 basis points more than Egypt’s, and in June, an average 240 basis points more, as Iraq recovered from the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
The unrest, inspired by the revolt that toppled Tunisia’s leader, “does raise political risks,” said Eric Fine, a portfolio manager in New York who helps Van Eck Associates Corp. oversee $3 billion in emerging-market assets. “If this is a revolution, the price of risk for Egypt could go much higher, and if it’s a failed one” the cost will drop to 300 basis points and probably 250, Fine said in a phone interview.”
While most of the increases in food prices are due to droughts and floods, US policy contributed to it mightily, argues Mike “Mish” Shedlock on his Global economic blog, revealing a reality the media has missed:
“Bernanke's "Quantitative Easing" policies combined with rampant credit growth in China and India has led to increased speculation in commodities. That speculation has forced up food prices.
Please note that speculation in commodities is not a cause of anything. Rather commodity speculation is a result of piss poor monetary policies not only the Fed, but central bankers worldwide.”
Michael Fitzsimmons says that US energy policy is also contributing to the problems in Egypt, but agrees that monetary policy is a prime culprit. He writes, “ to sum things up: Ben Bernanke's implementation of "QE2" has directly led to food inflation across the world. In many developing and poor countries (i.e. Egypt and elsewhere) food makes up a much larger percentage of an individual's income and is felt much more severely than in the U.S.
Why have most media outlets ignored this? The financiers schmoozing at the World Economic Forum in Davos know all about it and are worried as well as Bloomberg News reported.
“This protest won’t end in North Africa; it will spread in many countries because of high unemployment and increasing food prices,” Hamza Alkholi, chairman and chief executive of Saudi Alkholi Group, a holding company investing in industrials and real estate, said in an interview in Davos, Switzerland.
In an age of globalization, a hike in global prices will spread unrest globally. Egypt had its own “bread riot” in l977 when prices went up suddenly on the orders of the World Bank so it is no stranger to the need to fight back.
The question is why aren’t Americans up in arms too as inflation at the pump and the grocery store drives princes higher here. Part of the reason is that they don’t know that the US has worse economic inequality according to a scientific measure: The Gini Coefficent
Washington’s Blog reports “According to the CIA World Fact Book, the U.S. is ranked as the 42nd most unequal country in the world, with a Gini Coefficient of 45. Egypt in contrast is ranked as the 90th most unequal country, with a Gini Coefficient of around 34.4.”
He asks, “so why are Egyptians rioting, while the Americans are complacent?”
According to the report, Building a Better America, Dan Ariely of Duke University and Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School demonstrate Americans consistently underestimate the amount of inequality in our nation.
And why is that? Could our media have anything to do with it, a media consumed with when it bleeds it leads, but where context and background are missing?
Yes, the tens of thousands in the streets demanding the ouster of the cruel Mubarek regime are there now pressing for their right to make a political choice but they are being driven by an economic disaster that has sent unemployment skyrocketing and food prices climbing.
People are out in the streets not just to meet but by their need to eat.
As Nouriel Roubini who was among the first to predict the financial crisis while others were pooh-poohing him as “Dr Doom” says don’t just look at the crowds in Cairo but what is motivating them now, after years of silence and repression.
He says that the dramatic rise in energy and food prices has become a major global threat and a leading factor that has gone largely unreported in the coverage of events in Egypt.
"What has happened in Tunisia, is happening right now in Egypt, but also riots in Morocco, Algeria and Pakistan, are related not only to high unemployment rates and to income and wealth inequality, but also to this very sharp rise in food and commodity prices," Roubini said.
Prices in Egypt are up 17% because of a worldwide surge in commodity prices that has many factors but speculation on Wall Street and big banks is a key one.
As IPS reported, “Wall Street investment firms and banks, along with their kin in London and Europe, were responsible for the technology dot-com bubble, the stock market bubble, and the recent U.S. and UK housing bubbles. They extracted enormous profits and their bonuses before the inevitable collapse of each.
Now they've turned to basic commodities. The result? At a time when there has been no significant change in the global food supply or in food demand, the average cost of buying food shot up 32 percent from June to December 2010, according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Nothing but price speculation can explain wheat prices jumping 70 percent from June to December last year when global wheat stocks were stable, experts say.”
Here’s a key fact buried in a CNN Money report—the kind intended for investors, not the public at large: “About 40% of Egypt's citizens live off less than $2 a day, so any price increase hurts.”
Brilliant!
Think about that: what would you be doing if you were living of $2 a day. You won’t be drinking mochachinos at Starbucks, that’s for sure.
Trust me, the people on top are following this unrest closely on Wall Street as anxiety grows:
Reports the Washington Post:
U.S. stocks declined sharply Friday as violent clashes in Egypt injected a jolt of anxiety into global financial markets.
Egypt is central to U.S. interests in the Middle East as a moderate state and a key player in both counterterrorism operations and regional peace negotiations, said Helima L. Croft, a geopolitical analyst at Barclays Capital.
If street protests were to end President Hosni Mubarak's nearly 30-year hold on power, "I think there would be a fear that you could see radicalism sweeping across the Middle East," Croft said, adding that the fear might be unfounded.
Beyond its political significance, Egypt controls the Suez Canal, an important shipping lane.”
Suddenly, there are worries about Egypt being able to pay off its debt, it suddenly was pronounced riskier than Iraq, according to Asia Times:
“The cost of protecting Egyptian debt against default for five years with the contracts jumped 69 basis points, or 0.69 percentage points, this week to 375 today, compared with 328 for Iraq, according to prices from CMA, a data provider in London. Just last week, Iraqi swaps cost 19 basis points more than Egypt’s, and in June, an average 240 basis points more, as Iraq recovered from the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
The unrest, inspired by the revolt that toppled Tunisia’s leader, “does raise political risks,” said Eric Fine, a portfolio manager in New York who helps Van Eck Associates Corp. oversee $3 billion in emerging-market assets. “If this is a revolution, the price of risk for Egypt could go much higher, and if it’s a failed one” the cost will drop to 300 basis points and probably 250, Fine said in a phone interview.”
While most of the increases in food prices are due to droughts and floods, US policy contributed to it mightily, argues Mike “Mish” Shedlock on his Global economic blog, revealing a reality the media has missed:
“Bernanke's "Quantitative Easing" policies combined with rampant credit growth in China and India has led to increased speculation in commodities. That speculation has forced up food prices.
Please note that speculation in commodities is not a cause of anything. Rather commodity speculation is a result of piss poor monetary policies not only the Fed, but central bankers worldwide.”
Michael Fitzsimmons says that US energy policy is also contributing to the problems in Egypt, but agrees that monetary policy is a prime culprit. He writes, “ to sum things up: Ben Bernanke's implementation of "QE2" has directly led to food inflation across the world. In many developing and poor countries (i.e. Egypt and elsewhere) food makes up a much larger percentage of an individual's income and is felt much more severely than in the U.S.
Why have most media outlets ignored this? The financiers schmoozing at the World Economic Forum in Davos know all about it and are worried as well as Bloomberg News reported.
“This protest won’t end in North Africa; it will spread in many countries because of high unemployment and increasing food prices,” Hamza Alkholi, chairman and chief executive of Saudi Alkholi Group, a holding company investing in industrials and real estate, said in an interview in Davos, Switzerland.
In an age of globalization, a hike in global prices will spread unrest globally. Egypt had its own “bread riot” in l977 when prices went up suddenly on the orders of the World Bank so it is no stranger to the need to fight back.
The question is why aren’t Americans up in arms too as inflation at the pump and the grocery store drives princes higher here. Part of the reason is that they don’t know that the US has worse economic inequality according to a scientific measure: The Gini Coefficent
Washington’s Blog reports “According to the CIA World Fact Book, the U.S. is ranked as the 42nd most unequal country in the world, with a Gini Coefficient of 45. Egypt in contrast is ranked as the 90th most unequal country, with a Gini Coefficient of around 34.4.”
He asks, “so why are Egyptians rioting, while the Americans are complacent?”
According to the report, Building a Better America, Dan Ariely of Duke University and Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School demonstrate Americans consistently underestimate the amount of inequality in our nation.
And why is that? Could our media have anything to do with it, a media consumed with when it bleeds it leads, but where context and background are missing?
Rage, rage against the dying of the light: Dylan Thomas
THE ROVING EYE
Rage, rage against counter-revolution
By Pepe Escobar
Islamophobes of the world, shut up and listen to the sound of people power. Your artificial Middle East dichotomy - it's either "our" dictators or jihadism - was never more than a cheap trick. Political repression, mass unemployment and rising food prices are more lethal than an army of suicide bombers. This is the actual way history is written; a country of 80 million - two-thirds of which born after their dictator came to power in 1981, and no less than the heart of the Arab world - finally shatters the Wall of Fear and crosses to the side of self-respect.
Egypt's neo-Pharaoh Hosni Mubarak threw a curfew; people never left the streets. The police dissolved; citizens themselves organized for security. The tanks rolled in; people kept singing "hand in hand, the army and people are together". This is no think-tank-engineered color revolution, this is not regimented Islamists; this is average Egyptians bearing the national flag, "together, as individuals, in a great co-operative effort to reclaim our country", in the words of Egyptian Nobel prize-winning novelist Ahdaf Soueif.
But then, inevitable as death, counter-revolution reared its weaponized head. Made in USA fighter jets and military helicopters "bravely" flying low over the crowds at Tahrir Square (picture the Mubarak regime as the occupation army in Egypt; and imagine the West's outrage if this was happening in Tehran). Military commanders cozying up on state TV. A threat that made-in-USA tanks in the streets - manned by elite combat troops - would soon mean business (although soldiers told al-Jazeera reporters they would not fire a single bullet). To top it off, "subversive" al-Jazeera abruptly taken off the air.
Say hello to my suave torturer
The Egyptian intifada - among its multiple meanings - smashed to pieces the Western-concocted propaganda drive of "Arabs as terrorists". Now, minds finally decolonized, Arabs are inspiring the whole world, teaching the West how to go about democratic change. And guess what: one does not need "shock and awe", renditions, torture and trillions of Pentagon dollars to make it work! No wonder Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh, London or Paris never saw it coming.
We are all Egyptians now. The Latin American virus - bye-bye dictatorships plus arrogant, myopic neo-liberalism - has contaminated the Middle East. First Tunisia. Now Egypt. Next Yemen and possibly Jordan. Soon the House of Saud (no wonder they blamed the Egyptian people for the "riots"). But the Northern African political earthquake of Tunisia 2011 also got its spark from the 2010 mass strikes in Europe - Greece, Italy, France, the United Kingdom. Rage, rage, against political repression, dictatorship, police brutality, out of control food prices, inflation, miserable wages, mass unemployment.
Pharaoh 2011 does look like a remix of Shah of Iran 1979. Sure, there's no ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to lead the Egyptian masses, and former International Atomic Energy Agency chief, Egyptian Mohamed ElBaradei, is being accused by quite a few in the streets of "stealing our revolution". But it's hard not to remember that the Shah of Iran is buried in Cairo because Iranians wouldn't allow his body to rejoin the motherland.
The Pharaoh reacted to the Intifada by swiftly appointing his "suave" intelligence czar, Omar Suleiman, as vice president (the first since the Pharaoh took power in 1981), and virtual successor. Suleiman is a sinisterly suave Central Intelligence Agency-trusted "rendition" expert who has supervised countless torture sessions of alleged "terrorists" in Egyptian soil; the English-speaking lord of an Arabic Guantanamo. The Washington establishment is not exactly displeased.
Yet imperialists should take note: the last time the Egyptian street gelled this way was during the 1919 revolution against the British. Now, for Muslims and Christians, the working class, the middle class, the unemployed masses, lawyers, judges, scholars from al-Azhar University, students, peasants, theologians, independent journalists and bloggers, Muslim Brotherhood activists, the National Association for Change, the April 6th movement, for all them the days of Mubarak's Animal Farm are numbered.
Five opposition movements - including the Muslim Brotherhood - have mandated ElBaradei to negotiate the formation of a transitional "national salvation government". The odds that the Pharaoh will negotiate anything are next to zero. To add to the complexity the bulk of the urban young activist generation trusts "popular committees" rather than ElBaradei.
True, as far as next September's elections are concerned, Mubarak, 82, is dead. And so is son Gamal, 47. Unconfirmed reports swirl that in typical son-of-dictator mode he may have fled to London, using his British passport, with a lot of luggage, and is now in hiding in his townhouse in Knightsbridge.
The crucial, immediate future hangs on which way the Egyptian army will lean to. As it stands, even a Tiananmen option - hardcore repression - is not totally ruled out. Anyway, the regime's power play is clear; the Pharaoh might even board that plane - echoing the chants in the streets - but the regime, a military dictatorship, has got to stay.
General Hussein Tantawi, the army's commander in chief and minister of defense, who was being wined and dined by the Pentagon - from whom he gets US$1.3 billion a year in "aid" - flew back to Cairo. On a parallel track, the Pharaoh, desperately playing to the heart of the West's fears about "stability", tried to typecast the whole Intifada as an unruly mob of greedy slum dwellers bent on chaos and destruction. An array of Egyptian bloggers is adamant - the strategy is to scare people back into their homes begging for "security".
Issander El Amrani, on The Arabist blog, stresses his "hard time believing that Mubarak is still in charge, and that the hardcore of the regime is using extreme means to salvage its position". At street level, there's overwhelming suspicion of a Washington-orchestrated coup at the very top of the regime - the US/Israel betting on the formula "maybe no Mubarak/but definitely no regime change", even as Saudi, Israeli and official Egyptian media are pulling all stops to discredit the revolution. Just to put it into perspective; on the US one had Ronald Reagan (two terms), George H W Bush, Bill Clinton (two terms), George W Bush (two terms) and Barack Obama. In Cairo, one always had Mubarak.
The impoverished but proud, educated Egyptian middle class as well as the working class would love nothing better than a country following the rule of law and holding transparent elections. So how could they possibly trust Suleiman, a CIA-connected torturer, to conduct the transition? Not to mention a parliament totally controlled by the unbelievably corrupt Mubarak's National Democratic Party, whose headquarters was set on fire by the protesters.
Walk like a (dissident) Egyptian
I spent two months in Cairo and Alexandria in early 2003 waiting for the Bush invasion of Iraq - and hanging out mostly with the ocean of rejects of the Mubarak system, from college graduates to Sudanese immigrants, including dejected representatives of the 40% of the population that lives on less than $2 a day. Needless to say, all of them viewed Mubarak as a repulsive Washington poodle - and were in shock at the fate of Iraq, historically revered in Egypt as the eastern flank of the Arab nation. Their outlook of the regime was of the "throw the bums into the Nile" kind.
It was all very enlightening - and very painful - to experience on the ground the consequences of the Mubarak regime being a dutiful pupil of US-enforced neo-liberalism. Inevitable consequences were high inflation and widespread unemployment. The urban middle class had practically disappeared. The working class was subdued via ironclad control of unions. And the rural middle class - the regime's former base - also dwindled as more young people had to go urban to find a job (they didn't). What survived was a small, corrupt state-connected business class (most of whom are now scurrying off to Dubai on private jets).
So it's not puzzling that this is not an Islamic revolution, like Iran in 1979. It's the economy, stupid. Islam in Egypt today is essentially split between two currents; non-politicized Salafism and the Muslim Brotherhood - decimated by decades of repression and torture, and ultimately also without an explicit political program apart from providing social services neglected by the state.
The fact that the Brotherhood has been in the revolutionary backstage so far has to do with two factors. If it exposed itself too much, Mubarak would have had the perfect excuse to label the revolution as concocted by "terrorists". Additionally, the Brotherhood evaluated that this time it is only one actor among many.
This is a spontaneous popular movement following on the heels of Kefaya ("Enough!") - a "yellow" popular movement (its color of choice) by intellectuals and political activists whose slogan already in 2004 was La lil-tamdid, La lil-tawrith ("No to another mandate, no to a hereditary republic").
Kefaya, although an elite, leaderless, non-ideological movement, was the spark that launched a thousand movements, such as "Journalists for Change", Workers for Change", Doctors for Change" or "Youngsters for Change" that led to the current wave of urban, middle and lower middle class, web-savvy citizens organizing countless online forums.
Another crucial development has been the 2008 strike by textile workers in the Nile Delta town of Mahalla al-Kubra when three people were killed by Mubarak's security apparatus on April 16 - inspiring the homonymous online movement.
The Holy Grail was always to fully mobilize the masses. Last week, they finally crossed over. The Kefaya-influenced young still prefer popular committees over politicians to guide this revolution on the go. The pulse of the streets seems to point to many Egyptians not wanting any political or religious ideology to monopolize what is essentially a liquid, pluralistic, multiform movement bent on radically reforming the country and propelling it as a new model for the whole Arab world. It's all so seductively romantic, perhaps. But the yearning for a catharsis is inevitable after three decades of living in an Animal Farm.
I rebel, therefore I am
London School of Economics professor Fawaz Gerges has pointed out all this "goes beyond Mubarak. The barrier of fear has been removed. It is really the beginning of the end of the status quo in the region." It is in fact bigger; it's a graphic example of grassroots, organic political activism.
Or, in the elite speak of US foreign policy guru Dr Zbigniew Brzezinski, this is his dreaded "global political awakening" in action - the Generation Y across the developing world, angry, restless, outraged, emotionally shattered, mostly unemployed, stripped of their dignity, acting out their revolutionary potential and turning the status quo upside down (even with the Pharaoh promoting the biggest Internet blackout in history).
As much as Kefaya was the spark, this was also a Facebook revolution - now renamed in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez as Sawrabook ("the book of the revolution"). The RASD ("monitoring", in Arabic) network was launched at the very first day of the protests, last Tuesday, configured as a sort of "observatory of the revolution".
It's crucial to note that at the time - less than a long week ago - al-Jazeera was not even on the scene and Egyptian state TV was showing, as usual, faded black and white movies. In only three days, RASD networked 400,000 people in Egypt and abroad. When the Pharaoh regime woke up it was already too late - Internet shutdown and all.
It's this spirit of solidarity in action that has spilled over to the streets in the form of young activists operating landline phones, documenting injuries or setting up impromptu clinics. Or in the form of average Cairo residents boarding up their homes and setting up neighborhood watches to protect themselves from looters and thugs - widely reported by bloggers to be carrying security services IDs and Mubarak regime-issued weapons.
As alarmed as the rarified global elites may be by now - one just has to follow the labyrinth of ambiguities oozing from Washington and European capitals - at least Brzezinski has been wired enough to catch the drift, as in "major world powers, new and old ... face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low."
The new order is dying, but the new has not yet been born. The Age of Rage in the arc from Northern Africa to the Middle East may be on - but still no one knows what the next geopolitical configuration will be. Will people have a say - or will it all be corralled and controlled by the powers that be?
Egypt won't become a working democracy because of lack of political infrastructure. But it has to restart from scratch, with most of the opposition almost as reviled as the regime. The younger generation - empowered by the feeling of being on the right side of history - will be crucial.
They won't accept an optical illusion of regime change that ensures continuous "stability". They won't accept being hijacked by the US and Europe and presented with a new puppet. What they want is the shock of the new; a truly sovereign government, no more neo-liberalism, and a new Middle East political order. Expect the counter-revolution to be fierce. And extending way beyond a few bunkers in Cairo.
Rage, rage against counter-revolution
By Pepe Escobar
Islamophobes of the world, shut up and listen to the sound of people power. Your artificial Middle East dichotomy - it's either "our" dictators or jihadism - was never more than a cheap trick. Political repression, mass unemployment and rising food prices are more lethal than an army of suicide bombers. This is the actual way history is written; a country of 80 million - two-thirds of which born after their dictator came to power in 1981, and no less than the heart of the Arab world - finally shatters the Wall of Fear and crosses to the side of self-respect.
Egypt's neo-Pharaoh Hosni Mubarak threw a curfew; people never left the streets. The police dissolved; citizens themselves organized for security. The tanks rolled in; people kept singing "hand in hand, the army and people are together". This is no think-tank-engineered color revolution, this is not regimented Islamists; this is average Egyptians bearing the national flag, "together, as individuals, in a great co-operative effort to reclaim our country", in the words of Egyptian Nobel prize-winning novelist Ahdaf Soueif.
But then, inevitable as death, counter-revolution reared its weaponized head. Made in USA fighter jets and military helicopters "bravely" flying low over the crowds at Tahrir Square (picture the Mubarak regime as the occupation army in Egypt; and imagine the West's outrage if this was happening in Tehran). Military commanders cozying up on state TV. A threat that made-in-USA tanks in the streets - manned by elite combat troops - would soon mean business (although soldiers told al-Jazeera reporters they would not fire a single bullet). To top it off, "subversive" al-Jazeera abruptly taken off the air.
Say hello to my suave torturer
The Egyptian intifada - among its multiple meanings - smashed to pieces the Western-concocted propaganda drive of "Arabs as terrorists". Now, minds finally decolonized, Arabs are inspiring the whole world, teaching the West how to go about democratic change. And guess what: one does not need "shock and awe", renditions, torture and trillions of Pentagon dollars to make it work! No wonder Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh, London or Paris never saw it coming.
We are all Egyptians now. The Latin American virus - bye-bye dictatorships plus arrogant, myopic neo-liberalism - has contaminated the Middle East. First Tunisia. Now Egypt. Next Yemen and possibly Jordan. Soon the House of Saud (no wonder they blamed the Egyptian people for the "riots"). But the Northern African political earthquake of Tunisia 2011 also got its spark from the 2010 mass strikes in Europe - Greece, Italy, France, the United Kingdom. Rage, rage, against political repression, dictatorship, police brutality, out of control food prices, inflation, miserable wages, mass unemployment.
Pharaoh 2011 does look like a remix of Shah of Iran 1979. Sure, there's no ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to lead the Egyptian masses, and former International Atomic Energy Agency chief, Egyptian Mohamed ElBaradei, is being accused by quite a few in the streets of "stealing our revolution". But it's hard not to remember that the Shah of Iran is buried in Cairo because Iranians wouldn't allow his body to rejoin the motherland.
The Pharaoh reacted to the Intifada by swiftly appointing his "suave" intelligence czar, Omar Suleiman, as vice president (the first since the Pharaoh took power in 1981), and virtual successor. Suleiman is a sinisterly suave Central Intelligence Agency-trusted "rendition" expert who has supervised countless torture sessions of alleged "terrorists" in Egyptian soil; the English-speaking lord of an Arabic Guantanamo. The Washington establishment is not exactly displeased.
Yet imperialists should take note: the last time the Egyptian street gelled this way was during the 1919 revolution against the British. Now, for Muslims and Christians, the working class, the middle class, the unemployed masses, lawyers, judges, scholars from al-Azhar University, students, peasants, theologians, independent journalists and bloggers, Muslim Brotherhood activists, the National Association for Change, the April 6th movement, for all them the days of Mubarak's Animal Farm are numbered.
Five opposition movements - including the Muslim Brotherhood - have mandated ElBaradei to negotiate the formation of a transitional "national salvation government". The odds that the Pharaoh will negotiate anything are next to zero. To add to the complexity the bulk of the urban young activist generation trusts "popular committees" rather than ElBaradei.
True, as far as next September's elections are concerned, Mubarak, 82, is dead. And so is son Gamal, 47. Unconfirmed reports swirl that in typical son-of-dictator mode he may have fled to London, using his British passport, with a lot of luggage, and is now in hiding in his townhouse in Knightsbridge.
The crucial, immediate future hangs on which way the Egyptian army will lean to. As it stands, even a Tiananmen option - hardcore repression - is not totally ruled out. Anyway, the regime's power play is clear; the Pharaoh might even board that plane - echoing the chants in the streets - but the regime, a military dictatorship, has got to stay.
General Hussein Tantawi, the army's commander in chief and minister of defense, who was being wined and dined by the Pentagon - from whom he gets US$1.3 billion a year in "aid" - flew back to Cairo. On a parallel track, the Pharaoh, desperately playing to the heart of the West's fears about "stability", tried to typecast the whole Intifada as an unruly mob of greedy slum dwellers bent on chaos and destruction. An array of Egyptian bloggers is adamant - the strategy is to scare people back into their homes begging for "security".
Issander El Amrani, on The Arabist blog, stresses his "hard time believing that Mubarak is still in charge, and that the hardcore of the regime is using extreme means to salvage its position". At street level, there's overwhelming suspicion of a Washington-orchestrated coup at the very top of the regime - the US/Israel betting on the formula "maybe no Mubarak/but definitely no regime change", even as Saudi, Israeli and official Egyptian media are pulling all stops to discredit the revolution. Just to put it into perspective; on the US one had Ronald Reagan (two terms), George H W Bush, Bill Clinton (two terms), George W Bush (two terms) and Barack Obama. In Cairo, one always had Mubarak.
The impoverished but proud, educated Egyptian middle class as well as the working class would love nothing better than a country following the rule of law and holding transparent elections. So how could they possibly trust Suleiman, a CIA-connected torturer, to conduct the transition? Not to mention a parliament totally controlled by the unbelievably corrupt Mubarak's National Democratic Party, whose headquarters was set on fire by the protesters.
Walk like a (dissident) Egyptian
I spent two months in Cairo and Alexandria in early 2003 waiting for the Bush invasion of Iraq - and hanging out mostly with the ocean of rejects of the Mubarak system, from college graduates to Sudanese immigrants, including dejected representatives of the 40% of the population that lives on less than $2 a day. Needless to say, all of them viewed Mubarak as a repulsive Washington poodle - and were in shock at the fate of Iraq, historically revered in Egypt as the eastern flank of the Arab nation. Their outlook of the regime was of the "throw the bums into the Nile" kind.
It was all very enlightening - and very painful - to experience on the ground the consequences of the Mubarak regime being a dutiful pupil of US-enforced neo-liberalism. Inevitable consequences were high inflation and widespread unemployment. The urban middle class had practically disappeared. The working class was subdued via ironclad control of unions. And the rural middle class - the regime's former base - also dwindled as more young people had to go urban to find a job (they didn't). What survived was a small, corrupt state-connected business class (most of whom are now scurrying off to Dubai on private jets).
So it's not puzzling that this is not an Islamic revolution, like Iran in 1979. It's the economy, stupid. Islam in Egypt today is essentially split between two currents; non-politicized Salafism and the Muslim Brotherhood - decimated by decades of repression and torture, and ultimately also without an explicit political program apart from providing social services neglected by the state.
The fact that the Brotherhood has been in the revolutionary backstage so far has to do with two factors. If it exposed itself too much, Mubarak would have had the perfect excuse to label the revolution as concocted by "terrorists". Additionally, the Brotherhood evaluated that this time it is only one actor among many.
This is a spontaneous popular movement following on the heels of Kefaya ("Enough!") - a "yellow" popular movement (its color of choice) by intellectuals and political activists whose slogan already in 2004 was La lil-tamdid, La lil-tawrith ("No to another mandate, no to a hereditary republic").
Kefaya, although an elite, leaderless, non-ideological movement, was the spark that launched a thousand movements, such as "Journalists for Change", Workers for Change", Doctors for Change" or "Youngsters for Change" that led to the current wave of urban, middle and lower middle class, web-savvy citizens organizing countless online forums.
Another crucial development has been the 2008 strike by textile workers in the Nile Delta town of Mahalla al-Kubra when three people were killed by Mubarak's security apparatus on April 16 - inspiring the homonymous online movement.
The Holy Grail was always to fully mobilize the masses. Last week, they finally crossed over. The Kefaya-influenced young still prefer popular committees over politicians to guide this revolution on the go. The pulse of the streets seems to point to many Egyptians not wanting any political or religious ideology to monopolize what is essentially a liquid, pluralistic, multiform movement bent on radically reforming the country and propelling it as a new model for the whole Arab world. It's all so seductively romantic, perhaps. But the yearning for a catharsis is inevitable after three decades of living in an Animal Farm.
I rebel, therefore I am
London School of Economics professor Fawaz Gerges has pointed out all this "goes beyond Mubarak. The barrier of fear has been removed. It is really the beginning of the end of the status quo in the region." It is in fact bigger; it's a graphic example of grassroots, organic political activism.
Or, in the elite speak of US foreign policy guru Dr Zbigniew Brzezinski, this is his dreaded "global political awakening" in action - the Generation Y across the developing world, angry, restless, outraged, emotionally shattered, mostly unemployed, stripped of their dignity, acting out their revolutionary potential and turning the status quo upside down (even with the Pharaoh promoting the biggest Internet blackout in history).
As much as Kefaya was the spark, this was also a Facebook revolution - now renamed in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez as Sawrabook ("the book of the revolution"). The RASD ("monitoring", in Arabic) network was launched at the very first day of the protests, last Tuesday, configured as a sort of "observatory of the revolution".
It's crucial to note that at the time - less than a long week ago - al-Jazeera was not even on the scene and Egyptian state TV was showing, as usual, faded black and white movies. In only three days, RASD networked 400,000 people in Egypt and abroad. When the Pharaoh regime woke up it was already too late - Internet shutdown and all.
It's this spirit of solidarity in action that has spilled over to the streets in the form of young activists operating landline phones, documenting injuries or setting up impromptu clinics. Or in the form of average Cairo residents boarding up their homes and setting up neighborhood watches to protect themselves from looters and thugs - widely reported by bloggers to be carrying security services IDs and Mubarak regime-issued weapons.
As alarmed as the rarified global elites may be by now - one just has to follow the labyrinth of ambiguities oozing from Washington and European capitals - at least Brzezinski has been wired enough to catch the drift, as in "major world powers, new and old ... face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low."
The new order is dying, but the new has not yet been born. The Age of Rage in the arc from Northern Africa to the Middle East may be on - but still no one knows what the next geopolitical configuration will be. Will people have a say - or will it all be corralled and controlled by the powers that be?
Egypt won't become a working democracy because of lack of political infrastructure. But it has to restart from scratch, with most of the opposition almost as reviled as the regime. The younger generation - empowered by the feeling of being on the right side of history - will be crucial.
They won't accept an optical illusion of regime change that ensures continuous "stability". They won't accept being hijacked by the US and Europe and presented with a new puppet. What they want is the shock of the new; a truly sovereign government, no more neo-liberalism, and a new Middle East political order. Expect the counter-revolution to be fierce. And extending way beyond a few bunkers in Cairo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)