Introduction
In early March 2012, Egypt's interim government, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), lifted the travel ban on American NGO activists who were standing trial for illegal political activity and for receiving illicit foreign funds. Caving to U.S. pressure, the SCAF allowed the activists to leave Egypt before the end of their trial, thus putting an end to the intense campaign it had been waging for months against American-funded pro-democracy activities in Egypt.[1] Today it appears that the Muslim Brotherhood has likewise withdrawn its objection to this American aid, and that it was, in fact, party to the deal between the SCAF and the U.S. to free the activists.[2] U.S. Senator John McCain hinted as much at a press conference after the activists' release, when he thanked the Muslim Brotherhood for helping to bring the affair to a close.
The Muslim Brotherhood, for its part, angrily rejected McCain's statements and denied it had been involved in the decision to free the Americans without trial. A statement posted on the movement's website said: "The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood movement rejects the statements made by American figures, in which they thanked [the Muslim Brotherhood] for what they called its 'responsible position' on the NGO affair. These statements, which have been widely publicized in the local press, [make it seem] as though the Muslim Brotherhood had somehow mediated or intervened [in this affair]... These [allegations] infuriate us because the movement cannot allow itself to intervene in the affairs of the Egyptian judicial [system], out of respect for and a desire to preserve the independence [of this system]... The movement has, on more than one occasion, expressed its support for the non-government organizations, [but] has long sought to amend... the laws governing their operation..."[3]
The Muslim Brotherhood claimed further that McCain was, in fact, trying to slander it as payback for its refusal to intervene in the affair. Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Dr. Mahmoud Ghazlan said that the U.S. was dishonorably taking advantage of its meetings with movement members,[4] and that, in the future, the movement would be more careful in meeting with representatives of foreign governments. In a People's Council session, Speaker Sa'd Al-Katatni, from the Muslim Brotherhood party, criticized the decision to let the activists leave Egypt and promised to hold those responsible to account. He added that the decision had been political and unacceptable, and was the result of interference in Egypt's domestic affairs.[5] A cartoon posted on the internet (see below) shows one Egyptian citizen saying to another: "America thanks the Muslim Brotherhood for its fruitful cooperation in the deal, while Al-Katatni [portrayed as a two-faced figure with a long nose] says in parliament that he will demand an account from all those involved in the foreign funding case. Do they take us for fools?"
Source: http://www.mkank.com/vb/showthread.php?t=78446
However, in a March 22 article posted on the Muslim Brotherhood's official website, Dr. Hassan Al-Hayawan, head of the Al-Muqattam Association for Culture and Dialogue, wrote that the SCAF's deal with the U.S. had been necessary and justified. He explained that, in the current interim phase, Egypt was unable to withstand U.S. pressures, so the struggle against America would have to wait until Egypt organized its domestic affairs. He noted that even the Prophet Muhammad sometimes struck deals with his enemies when this served the greater interests of the Muslim community.
This article may indicate that, despite its denials, the Muslim Brotherhood was, indeed, party to the deal. In any case, it reflects the flexible and pragmatic approach that the movement is willing to adopt in order to rise to power, as well as its ability to use religious sources to justify its tactics.
Following are excerpts from Al-Hayawan's article.[6]
Article on Muslim Brotherhood Website: The SCAF's Deal with America Was a Necessity, Not a Disgrace
Al-Hayawan wrote: "Did the [Supreme Council] of the Armed Forces make a mistake in raising the issue of the foreign funding [allegations] against the U.S. at this interim stage? Most people would say yes. Did the [Supreme Council] of the Armed Forces make a mistake in ending the affair and allowing the defendants to leave [Egypt before standing trial]? [Once again,] most people would say yes...
"The foreign funding did indeed pose a threat to [Egypt's] national security, and detailed maps were even found dividing Egypt into four states[7]... Iraq and Sudan have already been divided in practice, and there are now attempts being made to divide Libya as well. [So] it is now [time to] carve up Egypt, by having Sudan suffocate it from the south, Libya from the west, and the Zionist entity from the east. Even more serious is [the fact that] the foreigners had detailed secret maps of Egyptian military concentrations. How did they come by them, and why?...
SUPPORT OUR WORK
"The [foreign] funding increased after the revolution, and sparked most of the unrest – from the Maspero [events] to the Port Said [incident][8] and [other incidents of] sectarian [strife], [protests] in various sectors, attacks on the police, criticism of the SCAF and conflicts with it, and [events] that undermined democracy and stability... and were aimed at misleading the [various sectors in] society and causing them to quarrel instead of achieving national accord.
"[So] why did the [Supreme Council] of the Armed Forces have to allow the Americans to leave? Because of the threat of Zionist military intervention, on the pretext of defending [Israel's] border with Sinai. We definitely witnessed Zionist statements preparing the ground for this [move]. In addition, the Americans had some trump cards to use against Egypt. First, its fundamental alliance with the [Zionist] entity, which is specifically [aimed] against Egypt. Second, its control over the Gulf states, which refrained from extending financial aid to Egypt thanks to American pressure, despite their official pledges. Third, [the threat to cut off] the military aid [to Egypt], which would paralyze our army in terms of [its ability to] arm itself, train, and maintain its gear. In addition, America can pressure every other party to refrain from providing us weapons. Finding alternatives or becoming self-reliant would require extensive reorganization. Fourth, all the international organizations that rule the world – the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization and the [UN] Security Council – issue reports according to America's will, [such as reports] on Egypt's poor credit rating, to keep the world from helping us.
"Egypt cannot deal with all this in the interim stage, after a comprehensive revolution. We will be able [to deal with it] in the future, with Allah's help. [Therefore,] the [Supreme Council] of the Armed Forces accepted the deal with America, and the deal itself is not forbidden and or disgraceful. [Rather] it is a necessary [part] of any relationship."
Even the Prophet Struck Deals with His Enemies to Further the Interests of His People
"The Prophet himself struck deals with [both] enemies and friends, but [always] for the benefit of his people and with full transparency. The results of [the SCAF's] deal are: avoiding certain war, sending the [American] activists away and thus putting an end to their hostile activity [in Egypt], and changing the position of the Gulf states and the world on the granting of loans to Egypt. But why didn't [the SCAF] explain this to everyone transparently? And why did they not make the deal conditional upon the release of Egyptians incarcerated in America?...
"Anyone who thinks we can [afford to] imprison Americans in the present circumstances is deluding himself. These are great [goals] that we all aspire to, but which cannot be implemented in practice [at the moment], because America would stage a military intervention and prevent them. That is why it sent a plane, brazenly and without permission, to bring back its citizens: because it was sure of the outcome. I do not mean to discourage [anyone], but merely to assess the situation [realistically], so that we put our domestic affairs in order before [turning to] fight the strongest power in the world.
"The U.S. will inevitably find itself in a conflict with the Egyptian people and society, not only with the elected [Egyptian] regime. This is evident from [the fact that] society came out in full force [in defiance of] the American threat to stop the aid...
"Since the ouster [of Mubarak], the strongest influence over Egypt is American, and it will remain so as long as the political forces [in Egypt] do not come to a national agreement to support the demands of the revolution and the people. We must all unite against the tyranny and corruption within, in order to meet the demands of the revolution, [and also unite] vis-à-vis the external [forces, namely] against the Zionist entity and America..."
* L. Lavi & N. Shamni are research fellows at MEMRI.
[1] On the Egyptian authorities' anti-American media campaign over the foreign funding affair, see MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series No. 795, "Crisis between Egypt, U.S. Deepens over American Funding to Civil Society Organizations," February 08, 2012, Crisis between Egypt, U.S. Deepens over American Funding to Civil Society Organizations.
[2] On the Muslim Brotherhood's campaign against the U.S. and the latter's aid to Egypt, see Inquiry & Analysis Series Report No.804, "Crisis between Egypt, U.S. Deepens over American Funding to Civil Society Organizations – Part II: The Islamists Join the Government/SCAF Campaign against the U.S.," February 24, 2012, Crisis between Egypt, U.S. Deepens over American Funding to Civil Society Organizations – Part II: The Islamists Join the Government/SCAF Campaign against the U.S..
[3] Ikhwanonline.com, March 2, 2012.
[4] He was alluding to a recent meeting between McCain and senior Muslim Brotherhood official Khairat Al-Shater, held shortly before the release of the American NGO activists. Al-Ahram (Egypt), March 4, 2012.
[5] Al-Ahram (Egypt), March 4, 2012.
[6] Ikhwanonline.com, March 22, 2012.
[7] See MEMRI Special Dispatch Series No. 4506, "Egyptian Government Daily: U.S. Striving to Divide Egypt into Four Countries," February 17, 2012, Egyptian Government Daily: U.S. Striving to Divide Egypt into Four Countries.
[8] In the "Maspero events" of October 9, 2011, Coptic demonstrators who were protesting the demolition of a church clashed with military and police forces in front of the Maspero television building in Cairo. Dozens of protesters, most of them Copts, were shot, run over or beaten to death by the security forces. The Port Said incident, in February 2012, involved a violent riot at a Port Said soccer match, in which dozens of fans of the Al-Masri soccer team were killed.
