Non-Independence Day in Egypt: Cautious Optimism or Impending Doom?

A few comments on the fall of Morsi and what’s happening in Egypt and the Islamic world.

It’s interesting how in this case even the mainstream media seems to acknowledge the Pentagon’s role in communicating with the Egyptian military.

The Camp David Accords which resulted in Sadat’s assassination was a geopolitical and diplomatic coup. Egypt was wrenched from the Soviet sphere and brought into the American column. The security mechanism which guarantees the status quo has always been the Egyptian military. This model replicated what the United States has done in Turkey, Chile and other nations as well.

In 2011, the situation got away from the United States and the Muslim Brotherhood found itself in a real world situation, which I’m sure they found both exciting and terrifying. They were forced to govern. Groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas while often labeled as terroristic in the US media are in fact social organizations (with militia wings) that before gaining political power often sought to act as shadow governments providing judicial and humanitarian services. It’s easy to do this as an opposition group. When you’re the formal legitimate government, it’s much more difficult.

This is an important difference often missed in the West…these groups are not the same as Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda offers nothing in the way of social vision…just a harsh regime of archaic and literalistic Sharia law. Al Qaeda has no economic plan, no means to fix the electrical grid, the sewers or to deal with environmental issues etc…

The Muslim Brotherhood did, but Morsi failed on several points. Undoubtedly they would argue they have been obstructed by elements within Egyptian society, some of which were probably allied with the West and thus had an interest in seeing the Brotherhood fail. This led Morsi to power-grab which only further alienated him.

In terms of economics, without stability and security no economic system can have any hope of success.

And Egypt is experiencing a divide…very similar to what’s happening in Turkey. The people are torn between three positions… out and out secularism, a more secular Islam and Islamism.

There are also extremist elements and sectarian and ethnic divides, but the heart of the matter lies in this social tension regarding the role of Islam in society.

In both Turkey and Egypt the majority of the people (I would argue the majority, some would differ) want a secularist Islam or what I’ve called Islam-lite in the past. They want their society to acknowledge Islam and reflect the values in a general sense…maybe government funding of holidays, mosque upkeep, even religious education in schools…

But they don’t want the state controlling dress, home economics, the role of women, alcohol or becoming involved in censorship etc…

In this way as I’ve argued they are in some ways very much like the less extreme version of the Christian Right in the United States. They want a religious society but nothing too strict, nothing forced.

There are some who would go further and want strict secularism, but they are few. Ironically the Christians (Copts in Egypt, Armenians and Syriacs in Syria) would fall into this camp. It is the position most advantageous to them though in the West it is considered anathema.

And then there are those (also a minority) who want strict Islamism and a more diligent and pervasive application of Sharia law.

Morsi belongs to the stricter camp but was steering toward the middle and in the end frustrated everyone. But those on the Islamist side were content with him and preferred him over and against a secular alternative.

The public at this point seems to be largely celebrating the military coup d’état and yet it must be frustrating. It means their democracy is faltering and has not yet proven functional. Will the Egyptian version of the Deep State (shadow military rule) continue?

If a Secular Islamist (for want of a better term) is elected, will the military accept it? This may in large part depend on the response and reaction coming out of Washington.

If Obama is the president and the new leader maintains Egypt’s status vis-à-vis Israel, then Washington will approve.

Two things could derail this.

1.    A different administration in Washington. A Romney or McCain would respond quite differently and further Western intervention will only aid the cause of the Islamic Extremists and in time Morsi will seem mild and accommodating. Or,

2.    It doesn’t matter who is in Washington because a Civil War breaks out in Egypt after the next election. At that point the military will probably install the candidate of choice and Egypt will spiral into chaos and great violence. The Copts will suffer as proxies for the West, and if the events in Syria are still taking place…the Middle East will be in great turmoil and become even more volatile than it is right now.

There are other factors and variables of course and in time things will continue to change. But right now the question is…will a candidate arise that all sides will accept, including Washington? As bad as Obama has been in terms of the warfare state, in this instance he is preferable to a Republican administration which would undoubtedly prove more bellicose. Obama is keeping low-key. I assure you Washington is not taking a hands-off position. They’re trying to work behind the scenes and I’m sure played no small role in the events of the past 48 hours which led to Morsi’s removal.

No matter what happens or what Obama does he will be criticized by the Conservative media. There are so many that think he’s an Islamist there’s nothing you can say to them to change their mind. They’re not interested in the truth or trying to understand what is happening. The foolish accused him of orchestrating the fall of Mubarak in 2011. No way. That was a sad day in Washington’s corridors of power. Only after it was inevitable did they spin the story and present it as positive. Seeking to affirm democracy they hoped the people would turn toward a more secular candidate like ElBaradei.

Even if Obama were to beat the war drum, it wouldn’t matter. The same thing happened under Clinton. The Republicans don’t want Democratic administrations to use the military. Military action is a time of national unity. They don’t want to stand with Obama and applaud his statements as he gives speeches. To them he’s not a legitimate commander-in-chief and they don’t want the military to work with his administration. What they really want (in my opinion) is for the Pentagon to run the policy and for Obama to look bad either through a diplomatic blunder or appearing indecisive. If he appears aggressive they’ll attack him for being an amateur and playing his hand too openly.

As a Christian I desire peace and stability. Egypt will probably function best with a mild form of Secular Islamism. The same is true of Syria. The minorities must have some form of Constitutional protection. If the government is allowed to function and work the message coming from the mouths of the extremists will lose traction. In the end Washington won’t get quite what they wanted, but the Islamic Extremists will also lose. A secular Middle East will prove a more peaceful proposition for the entire world and ultimately from the standpoint of the Gospel will (in time) be more open to proselytizing. When the Western lifestyle begins to prove bankrupt and empty (as it is for some in China)…people will be willing to listen if they can receive a non-Americanist version of the Gospel.

We can hope at that time God will raise up some who can speak with such a voice and message.