By Tahrir Square always drew a crowd but on that day, Tahrir held more people than ever, spilling many onto the surrounding streets, creating traffic — creating history. Their chants were louder than the fireworks; “Egypt is free!” they cried as the colors flickered across their faces. “Hold your heads high, you’re Egyptian!” Many bent over to kiss the ground of the plaza that had become a symbol of the revolution, of freedom, of the surrender of Hosni Mubarak who had been the country’s dictator for almost 30 years.
But about five years after the Arab Spring, no trace of this scene remains.
The Arab Spring began in 2010 with anti-government protests in Tunis, it sparked protests in many surrounding countries that were inspired by the success of the Tunisian revolution. Frustrated with the corrupt dictatorship of Mubarak, the Egyptian people began protesting against the government in January of 2011. They occupied Tahrir Square for eighteen days until Mubarak stepped down. Protests continued as elections began to determine a new president.
In January of 2012 the Muslim Brotherhood won the election as Mohammad Morsi emerged as the winner of the presidency and Mubarak was sentenced to life in prison. Later that year, in the face of a weakening economy, Morsi gave himself unchecked power and a new Islamist constitution was introduced — Islam is a religion promoting peace and unity and Islamicism is a political ideology that believes in applying Islamic doctrine to law. It is important to note that not all Muslims are Islamists. The controversial constitution, along with Morsi’s overbearing authority, incited violent protests in 2013 and the eventual overthrow of Morsi in July of that year. After hundreds were killed in pro-Morsi rallies, the US suspended a large part of the 1.3 billion dollars of aid to Egypt. In response, the government of Egypt declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group and introduced a new constitution in 2014 that banned political parties based on religion. In May of 2014, the former army chief, Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, won the presidential election with more than 90% of the votes.
Sisi’s administration began by targeting the Islamists, which was welcomed by many who were uncomfortable with Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood’s far reach into the government. The crackdown on Islamists, that has been called Egypt’s “war on terror”, has morphed into a full blown ban on dissent. However, the “war on terror” has been anything but effective. In fact, according to Daily News Egypt, the total number of people killed in the proliferating terrorist attacks, as of 2014, has risen to 700 people and in 2015 there have been over 331 terrorist attacks. Ironically, Sisi’s “war on terror” has only lead to an increase in terror, proving its inefficiency. The crackdown on dissent has also lead Egypt to have the highest number of journalists behind bars as anyone who speaks out against the government is subject to the harsh consequences.
Ironically, Sisi’s “war on terror” has only lead to an increase in terror, proving its inefficiency.
Many are calling this time in Egypt’s history a reversal of the historic moment in Tahrir Square that will be etched into Egyptian history forever. They’re calling it a counter-revolution. After about five years, they find themselves facing some of the same things they had fought so strongly to destroy: suppression of freedom of speech, police brutality, torture, political repression, and oppression of women and other minorities. In retrospect, it almost seems as if the revolution accomplished nothing. Across the Middle East, it appears that the Arab Spring worked more in favor of dictatorship than of freedom and dignity. In Egypt, and the Middle East in general, the Arab Spring (along with past revolutions) that lead to thousands of deaths and mass instability resulted in authoritarian rule once again because it provided short-term stability but will inevitably lead to unrest. Ultimately, Middle Eastern politics has become a series of unrest and revolutions that send a message to the people of the region that violence is the only way to be heard.
Rather than repeat history blindly, to move forward after almost five years of discontent, the Egyptian people should look to what made their revolution so successful in the first place: their tenacity, their passion and their ability to work together regardless of societal barriers to force Mubarak to step down. After Mubarak, many people were surprised that the Muslim Brotherhood gained office, but in actuality, it was not much of a shock. After Mubarak stepped down, many different groups began debating over the office. The Muslim Brotherhood was the only united group at the time, which lead them to win the election. The Egyptian people should look to the power of this unity. When they choose to move forward, if they need to take the values that they brought with them to Tahrir Square almost five years ago. Only then will they be able to truly say, “Egypt is free!”
__
Image: Los Angeles Times
wow. I was waiting for the blame America part. but it never came.
unfortunately, it really is starting to look like arabs just aren’t ready for democracy. although Tunisia is a glimmer of hope. they even had a governmental transfer of power already. of course that was after two secular politicians were shot. but the islamists did step down after election.
I think the main problem with this article is the perceived unity.
You never let them have their democracy. The main problem with Arabs that they cannot wait for another election albeit their leaders also don,t allow it to happen. But then again democracy did not come in a jiffy in france and America. Even after american civil war and american independence it took decades to give women and blacks their voting rights or for that matter to estabilish democracy in France. England had success in those regards while Germany,s Weimar failed. Tunisia somehow succeeded while others failed. Syria failed miserably while Egypt is on a thread. Iran in a way was on the path to acquire secular democracy in 1950s but then I blame America and britain for that.
hey, what is up asham. man, get you away from religious superstitions and you sound down right reasonable. you don’t think that the assassination attempt of the shah in 49 had anything to do with stifling democratic reforms in iran? I know I know, all you see is the 53 coup to reinstate him. but speaking of iran, the green revolution pre-dated the arab spring. even with that girl getting shot on youtube, the regime held on. interesting that in places with American influence, ben ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt the dictators stepped down with very little violence. but were America had no influence, Libya, Syria you see civil war.
you are right, they can’t wait for the next election. plus they seem to think it is going to be some sort of cure all. their main problems are economic and demographic. they don’t seem to mind the dictators as long as they have food on the table. the arab spring was brought on by economic factors and of course the baby boom of the muslim world. you get a bunch of unemployed men standing around and something has got to give.
as for democracy in a jiffy. there is a big difference in forging a new political system, as England, America and France did, and simply implementing an existing system.
Just Saying I do condemn the Indonesian province of Aceh but you must understand that province has a history of seperatism. You should understand the dynamics behind the formation of Indonesia after Dutch rule to understand that. On one part Ii agree but you are mixing to things. Palestinian right toself determination as an independent soverign state has nothing to do with religion. Yes ofcourse arabs being muslims and jews being jews complicates things but one must not forget that many founding members of PLO or west bank were and are christian as well. I agree on your western philosophy part but I don,t know man. Israel is not what you think it is. It has occupied Palestinian territories since 4 decades. And I dont know man you always inject scriptures. I have read bible the book on which Israel is based and I think its quite hypocritical of you to deny Palestinians their right of self determination just because of Quran and religious scriptures. And I think you should read Old Testament maybe you would not remain a fan Israelis either. And stop with the crap they are not religious or are atheists. I will not buy it I assure you.
muslism often have a history of separatism. look at the southern Philippines.
what is important to understand about the formation of Indonesia when the providence wants to implement the hadd punishments? what does Suharto have to do with lashing fornicators? gays?
when did I say that the isrealis are atheist. I think they are religious nuts. they believe that god wants them to rule the area. just like muslims think god wants them to rule the area of ‘the farthest mosque’. or mecca and medina. or the world.
of course isreali has occupied the area for the last 70 years. the jews conquered Palestine after the brits withdrew from the british mandate. that is what conquerors do, they occupy. they started to work on conquering the area before the balfour declaration.
why would you condemn the province of aceh for doing what the koran says?
Just like Jews dont condemn gays and christians pretty much are OK everything right now. Let me remind you all are abrahmic religions albeit Islam considers the previous two as outdated and their texts including Old Testament as perverted over time by their time. I am not saying this Prophet is. He also denied that Lut slept with his daughters. Phillipines, you should know better because America ruled that country after spanish american war and the history between moro people and USA is a longer one then intervention by the latter in middle east. The present estabalishment does not treat moro, a derogatory word for muslims in Phillipines very well.
yes, all are Abrahamic, no need to remind me. they are all a danger to modernity. separation of religion and government is the greatest concept of the American constitution. unfortunately, most muslims, and I mean a big majority, see islam as not only a religion but a form of government.
what does McKinley’s poor choice to keep the Philippines as a territory have to do with the current muslim and the predating muslims insurgency there. I know your first instinct is to blame America for everything, but the muslims have been fighting for an independent ‘isalmic state’ (that term sounds familiar) long before 1898.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangsamoro_(political_entity)
I still don’t get why you, as a muslim (I’m assuming), would be against the providence of Aceh implementing Islamic law?
I don’t know if it was from an internal source or from the media, but I’ve always been uncomfortable and confused by the term “Islamist” Seems like it was given a more clear definition here, but when I hear it, it seems like it’s trying to put a negative flavor or connotation on Islam itself.