Would Gen. Manaf Tlass ease Assad’s way out?

The Syria uprising entered a dramatic new phase with today’s killing in a bomb attack in the heart of Damascus of at least four of President Bashar al-Assad's top security aides.

They are Defense Minister Gen. Daoud Rajha; his deputy Assef Shawkat (who is Assad's brother-in-law); former defense minister and current Assistant Vice President Hassan Turkmani; and Hafez Makhlouf, head of Intelligence Agency investigations and brother of business tycoon Rami Makhlouf.

Several security officials were also seriously wounded in the attack, including Intelligence chief Hisham Bekhtyar and Interior Minister Mohammad Ibrahim al-Shaar.

The attack on the headquarters of Syria's National Security Council in the Rawda area is a deadly blow to the heart of the regime after two recent high-level defections – by Syria's ambassador to Iraq, Nawaf al-Faris, and a Republican Guard general, Manaf Tlass.

News of the devastating blow to Assad’s regime broke while I was working on the post below. For a while, I thought the post has probably been overtaken by events.

I doubt, but I leave it to the reader to judge:

Manaf Tlass (right) with Hafez and Bashar al-Assad

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) oversaw the transition in Egypt from Hosni Mubarak to Mohamed Morsy.

Would world powers refine the SCAF template and choose a body of senior officers in the Syrian military to oversee a Syria transition plan?

If so, would Brig-Gen. Manaf Tlass, a Sunnite member of President Bashar al-Assad’s inner circle and commander of one of Syria’s elite Republic Guard units who moved to France earlier this month, turn into Syria’s Hussein Tantawi?

Tlass yesterday called for a political transition in Syria and condemned military attacks on civilians in a statement sent to AFP.

Expressing anger that security forces were being used to suppress dissent, he said the regime held “the major responsibility” for the crisis and confirmed he was in Paris.

“I sincerely hope the blood stops flowing and the country emerges from the crisis through a phase of constructive transition that guarantees Syria its unity, stability and security, as well as the aspirations of its people,” said Tlass, a childhood friend of Assad.

“I am ready like any other Syrian, with no other ambition, to fulfill my civic duty to contribute to a better future for my country, as much as I can, and like all those... who have already made many sacrifices,” he said.

However, he did not specifically call for Assad to step down or say he was joining the Syrian opposition.

“I cannot but express my anger and pain at seeing the army pushed to carry out a fight that is against its principles, a fight directed by security forces and in which the people, including the soldiers, are the victims,” he said.

“When I took a position and refused to take part in the security action, I was isolated, accused and even labeled a traitor,” he said. “But my conscience, my deep conviction, pushed me to challenge this destructive action and to distance myself.”

Tlass said in the statement sent to AFP: “Faithful to my country and my beliefs, I always tried over the past 18 months to do my duty, unfortunately without success. I was not complacent with the regime, I did not accept nor participate in an action that led the country to its current tragic situation.”

Writing for today’s edition of the Lebanese pro-Assad daily al-Akhbar, Nasser Sharara gives an invaluable insight into the reasons behind Tlass’ flight to France.

My synopsis of Sharara’s 1,700-word account:

To this day, the way Manaf Tlass left Damascus remains a mystery to the Syrian security services.

He may have left via Lebanon. What is certain is that on the day news broke of Manaf having left Syria, his wife and young son who were in Beirut were driven by “M.H.” to Rafik Hariri International airport. There, they boarded a flight to Paris under their real names: “Tala Ahmad Khair (maiden name of Manaf’s wife) and (her son) Ahmed Manaf Tlass.”

In Damascus, however, officials still have reservations about calling Manaf a “traitor.” It seems “they’re still betting on keeping him close to President Assad whether he returns to Syria or stays abroad.”

Manaf did not break with Assad. He kept saying his clash was with the security services bigwigs who had Assad’s ear.

He complained to visitors, “The three closest persons to the late Hafez Assad were Sunnites. With the president now, I rank ninth.”

Manaf’s disaffection was with “the political solution saboteurs.” Media reports that he sulked at home after taking off his military uniform are false. Even when slamming “spoilers” in the security services, he kept turning out at his office in the presidential palace and at the headquarters of Presidential Guard Unit #105, which he commanded.

Throughout his disaffection, Manaf remained in contact and on good terms with Assad, whom he always addressed as “Boss.” He also kept repeating, “I can play the role of a go-between, connecting the Sunnite opposition in particular with President Assad. I played that role before. The Boss mandated me earlier to do just that. But opponents of a political solution sabotaged my task for fear of losing their vested interests in case a settlement is reached. That’s why I bowed out.”

In early 2012, Manaf got wind of a Moscow-backed suggestion by world stakeholders to solve the Syria crisis by a agreeing a mixed military council to oversee a political transition. The council would consist of officers from the various sects and mirror Egypt’s SCAF. People who heard him discuss this felt he was thrilled by the idea, “perhaps because he was promised a key role in the council.”

Recommended link:

An Alawite State in Syria?

Hazardous American switch of Egyptian horses

AP photos of Clinton with Tantawi today (above) and Morsy yesterday

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was at this writing meeting with Egypt's Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, a day after holding talks with newly-elected President Mohamed Morsy and urging a “smooth transition” to full democracy.

She landed in Egypt on Saturday in the middle of a tug of war between the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) headed by Tantawi and Morsy, a longtime member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Morsy triggered the standoff by ordering parliament to reconvene in defiance of SCAF’s earlier decision to disband the people’s assembly.

After her Saturday meeting with Morsy, Clinton told a news conference her talks with Tantawi would focus on “working to support the military’s return to a purely national security role.”

She said, “As compared to what we are seeing in Syria, which is the military murdering their own people, the SCAF here protected the Egyptian nation,” and had oversaw free elections. “But there is more work ahead, and I think the issues around the parliament, the constitution have to be resolved between and among Egyptians.”

Egypt’s media star and talk show host Imad Adeeb speaks of “A Dangerous Visit to Cairo.”

Clinton’s arrival in the Egyptian capital, he writes in his daily column for the leading Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat, “comes at a historic crossroads” for U.S. policy.

“The visit comes at a time when the U.S. administration is changing Egyptian horses in midstream – from betting on the military since the 1952 coup to betting on the Muslim Brotherhood movement’s rule.

“The shift affects the old SCAF ally, whose sun is dusking, as well as Brotherhood forces, whose moon is shining…

“Clinton comes to Egypt amidst a constitutional, legal, popular and information struggle that risks turning bloody.

“She comes after half the Egyptian electorate voted against her administration-backed Brotherhood candidate.

“Clinton comes when SCAF are almost certain she will be blessing the Muslim Brotherhood’s push for a new presidential decree retiring the SCAF generals and appointing Muslim Brothers to head the General Intelligence Directorate (GIS), the State Security Investigations Service (SSI) and the ministries of Justice, Foreign Affairs, Interior and Defense.”

Adeeb’s conclusion is that such “knockout policy blow” would lead either “to extended and stable Muslim Brotherhood rule, or a military coup in a matter of days, or a state of permanent chaos.”

Arab Spring dons the Muslim Brotherhood robe

Mohamed Mursi's portrait in Tahrir Square yesterday (Photo by Mai Shaheen) 

Portraits of Mursi predecessors Naguib, Nasser, Sadat and Mubarak

 Following is my paraphrasing of a leader comment written in Arabic by Ghassan Charbel, editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat:

He was a toddler at the outbreak of the Egyptian Revolution of 1952. No wonder he doesn’t recall Muhammad Naguib and military communiqué Number One.

He went to school during the years of Gamal Abdel Nasser. In the seventies under Anwar Sadat, he graduated with honors from university and enlisted in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Under Hosni Mubarak’s long term in office, he entered both the People’s Assembly and jail.

It is thus difficult to compare Egypt’s new president to any of his four predecessors. He didn’t read from the same book or drink from the same spring.

He received his PhD (in rocket science) from the University of Southern California and went on to serve as a professor (at California State University in North Ridge). This in no way means Mohamed Mursi is western-educated.

Unlike his forerunners, he did not spring from a military academy.  He sprang from the (Muslim Brotherhood) General Guide’s gown.

We saw yesterday what no one could have imagined a couple of years ago. Mursi himself wouldn’t have dared envisage a dream of such magnitude. No Muslim Brother could have visualized a colleague sitting in Nasser’s chair or Sadat’s rest house or Mubarak’s executive office in Uruba Palace. Mursi was an active and tenacious legislator who anticipated sitting behind bars, not in a palace.

You can safely say luck served him well.

Angry youths mobilized for change and the Muslim Brotherhood promptly seized the historic opportunity. It had deeper roots and greater means and was better organized than the youths. The revolution simply dropped into its lap.

Luck meantime knocked at Mursi’s door. As soon as Khairat el-Shater was disqualified, the Muslim Brotherhood rallied to resolutely back is standby candidate.

Good fortune remained on Mursi’s side when Ahmed Shafiq, a former air force commander and the Mubarak regime’s last prime minister, became his opponent in the presidential runoffs.

Many voters had to make a bitter choice. Mursi was not the safe bet for a civil state, but Shafiq evoked memories of a forlorn past. The ballot box chose Mursi, leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, as post-revolution president and Egypt donned the Muslim Brotherhood’s robe – but under the military’s watchful eyes.

Mursi’s victory is supposed to close the chapter of chicanery, rhetoric and ruthlessness. So exit the pipe dreams and enter the facts and figures.

The president-elect now has to think hard of how to revive the ailing economy. He has to reassure investors, tourists, allies and friends. He needs daring, robust and flexible policies coupled with a disposition to compromise.

He has to reassure Egypt, which is sharply divided. He has to reassure those in fear of uniform opinion, the uniform dress code and a possible obsolete approach to economic, political, minority and women issues.

He must tackle the problems of the constitution, the national assembly and the president’s prerogatives, especially that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) emasculated the president-elect before he was named.

He must ponder Egypt’s regional role, its ties with Israel, the United States and the European Union and mull over the issues of foreign aid, loans and grants and their attached strings.

Mursi’s journey won’t be easy. Freezing his Brotherhood membership and proposing to co-opt others won’t suffice. He has to quickly sponsor a serious and comprehensive nationwide reconciliation. The number of voters in his favor shows he won a narrow and conditional mandate. He has to realize his party is henceforth accountable for the people’s demands and aspirations.

Dreams are susceptible to cosmetics. Figures are harsh and bare. The days ahead might prove that the Muslim Brotherhood risked a lot when it insisted on winning the presidential palace.

On the whole, Egypt revolted, voted and held its breath waiting for the new president’s name. It was a tough exercise in democracy and its anxieties.

Egypt went to the polls and chose an Islamist for president, confirming thereby the Arab Spring’s identity as first transpired in Tunisia.

It’s not an overstatement to say a changed Egypt is before us. We can also say a changed region is dawning. The Spring that garbed Egypt in a Muslim Brotherhood robe is now drowning in Syria in a sea of funerals and regional and international prizefights.

The region is into a season of tremors, surprises and breakdowns. So please fasten your seat belts.

The new Egyptian politics clarified in 300 words

Egyptian women marching for the right to co-draft Egypt's new constitution (CNN photo)

Leading Egyptian political analyst and the Middle East’s pioneer talk show host Emad Adeeb sounds disheartened by the power struggles at work in his native country. I rephrased his succinct comment, appearing in Arabic today in the Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat. The comment captures the intricacies of the new Egyptian politics in some 300 words:   

There is in Egypt a clash of wills positioning multiple sides on a chilling collision course. Each side has its own logic to singlehandedly gauge absolute truth and fulfill its unabridged right to run the affairs of state.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) reckons it is the standard-bearer of the regime’s legitimacy, the hero of the 1973 October War and the protector and booster of the 2011 Egyptian revolution.

The Muslim Brotherhood believes it has the longest chronicled legacy of struggle dating back to 1928, when Sheikh Hassan al-Banna set off on the path of inner, spiritual Jihad. The Brotherhood considers it suffered most from the prisons and lockups of Nasser, Sadat and Mubarak. It also thinks its ballot box wins in recent parliamentary and trade union elections entitle it to manage the country’s affairs.

The Tahrir Square rebels in turn deem they were the only ones to put their lives on the line when everyone else despaired of changing the previous regime. They say they were the ones to take to the streets and occupy public squares in a unique revolution that will have a distinct place in history. Accordingly, they judge they have the full right to build the present and the future. To their mind, it is inconceivable for forces of the past to be makers of the now and the coming times.

No one imagines the other side being right. Each side trusts it is the beneficiary of the new regime that has yet to be built.

In Egypt, the old regime was not brought down so it can be replaced. Underway are failed attempts to bring down the curtain on the past and visionless bids to build the future.

Without dialogue, understanding, negotiation and clear plan, this experiment has no true prospect.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s rationality lacks political flexibility and advocates the following: “We are the majority. You have to accept what we want. Follow our path, or simply go wherever you want.”

Is this plausible?

Egypt: “Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves”

Albert Robida illustration of the Forty Thieves (from Wikipedia)

“We were able to bring down Ali Baba. We now have to go after the Forty Thieves.”

Gamal Heshmat, undersecretary of the foreign affairs committee in Egypt’s newly elected parliament, was reacting in Cairo to the disaster that left 79 people dead and hundreds more maimed after a football match between top-tier clubs al-Masry and al-Ahly in Port Said last Wednesday.

He was borrowing from the folk tale in medieval Arabic literature of “Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves” to evoke the overthrow of former president Hosni Mubarak a year ago before pointing the finger of blame for the football catastrophe at Egypt’s ruling generals in the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF).

As the print and electronic media continue to show images and video clips of those fatally stabbed, bludgeoned or crushed to death and injured in the Port Said violence, the focus now is on holding SCAF and the Central Security Forces (CSF) to account.

The worst disaster in Egypt’s football history on February 1 has not stopped reverberating in Suez and Cairo street battles, leaving four people dead and more than a thousand injured by this writing today.

In an extraordinary session of Parliament on Thursday, several legislators -- including Amr Hamzawy, Mostafa El-Naggar, Mohamed Abu Hamed and Abu Ezz El-Hariri – accused SCAF of being responsible for the violence, demanding that it hand over power to a civilian authority as soon as possible.

Some MPs echoed the sentiments of protesters by demanding the end of military rule, either by holding presidential elections earlier than the scheduled date of June 2012, or by the appointment of a national salvation government to assume power until a civilian president is elected.

"There is a political crisis because SCAF has lost its legitimacy, which it originally gained on February 11 by the power of the people," said liberal MP Hamzawy during the session. "The main reason why SCAF assumed power was to end the bloodshed [during the revolution] and that hasn't happened yet."

The Moslem Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, which dominates parliament, detected "invisible planning" behind "this unjustified massacre" in an online statement. But its most prominent representative, Essam al-Erian, said the ruling military and police were complicit. Their aim, he believed, was to show the need to maintain restrictive emergency laws.

Most of the dead at Port Said stadium were al-Ahly supporters. Hardcore fans - known as "Ultras" - have accused SCAF and SCF of allowing the killings to happen.

They say the authorities wanted revenge because the Ultras were among those battling army and police forces during last year's revolution that toppled Mubarak.

Ahram Online has a very informative news feature (and a series of 10 videos) on Egyptian football’s Ultras that are now strongly involved in the country’s heated domestic affairs.

According to Ahram Online writer Sherif Tarek:

Capitalizing on their physical and organizational capabilities, the flamboyant youth Ultras have featured prominently in recurring confrontations with security forces, and also took part in protests — though not all — throughout the year 2011.

But much as their out-of-stadium appearances gave momentum to events that politically impacted Egypt over the past few months, the motives of the Ultras as a group can barely be deemed political…

During the 18-day revolt last year, Ultras members decided to hit the streets as individuals. However, they became noticed as a group.

Particularly, Ultras Ahlawy and Zamalek’s White Knights soldiered on in Tahrir Square in the face of brutal attacks from the notorious CSF and hired thugs who assaulted and killed protesters in the infamous Battle of the Camel.

Much to their pride and in most battles, members of the fanatic fan bases vanquished the deposed regime’s police personnel and thugs, who eventually failed to nip the uprising in the bud...

At the time, bringing about political upheaval was not really what enthused the Ultras. Rather, the impulse was to lock horns with their archenemies, the police, to avenge abuses they had previously suffered under Mubarak’s security apparatus.

The same urge has ever since remained their primary motive to join political rallies…

On the “Friday of Correcting the Path” on September 9, eight months after the revolution, Ultras Ahlawy and the White Knights made their most sturdy and sensational return to Tahrir Square, the focal point of the January uprising.

On that day, other protesters called for the fulfillment of many demands, such as retribution against those who killed peaceful demonstrators during the revolution and the end of military trials for civilians. The Ultras groups, on the other hand, were there for a dispute with the Interior Ministry.

Their main demand was the release of their cohorts who were arrested three days earlier following a brawl that had erupted with the CSF after the final whistle of an Ahly cup match.

That post-match scuffle reportedly took place when the CSF assaulted Ahly’s Ultras in the stands and arrested some of them, apparently because they cursed Mubarak and former Interior Minister Habib el-Adly in the dying minutes of the game.

While protesting the incident, the Ultras vociferously chanted again against the infamous pair throughout Tahrir and all the way to the nearby Ministry of Interior headquarters…

“All demonstrators always welcome the Ultras members in Tahrir Square,” Ahmed Ezzat, general coordinator of the Popular Committees for Protecting the Revolution, told Ahram Online. “They are highly organized and are not looking for any media attention,” he added. “They have the tendency to struggle in hard times; they are perceived to be comrades in the project of the revolution and have robustly supported the revolutionaries all along.”

***

The morning after the Massacre at Port Said, renowned journalist and author Dima Khatib, contributed an op-ed piece for Counterfire on the prominent role played by the “Ultras” in the Egyptian revolution and speculation of regime complicity in the crowd violence at the Port Said match.

Ms Khatib wrote for Counterfire:

Do you remember this (video)?

Let me refresh your memory. It was on the 2 February 2011, one year ago. Thugs on camels, horses and donkeys, which came all the way from the Pyramids, about 17 kilometers away, attacked Tahrir Square. These clashes that lasted for hours and hours, being watched live on TV all over the world, came to be known as the Camel Battle. It was an unforgettable day in Egypt's 18 days of protests that ended up with toppling Hosni Mubarak on 11 February 2011. 





The pitch invasion in Port Said (photo from albawaba.com)

Now look at this (Port Said video dated 1 February 2012).

So one year later, at a football stadium in the city of Port Said, chaos breaks after a football match and somehow violence ends up with a death toll of almost 80 people and 300 more injured! Now going back to that famous Camel Battle a year ago, anyone who was there that day in Tahrir would tell you that the Ultras showed amazing bravery in standing up to the thugs and protecting the protesters from them. Yes. I am talking about football Ultras who usually spend their time and energy cheering and chanting for football teams. In fact Egypt's Ultras have played a very important role in the Revolution, not just on 2 February. They were there from day 1 (25 January 2011) chanting, leading and protecting the protesters. I did not know about them until I went to Egypt after Mubarak's fall. It was on 19 June 2011 that I first met an Ultra. It was on 19 June 2011 that I first heard an anti-SCAF slogan too, chanted by the Ultra.

It was outside the Military Prosecution's Office. A very small group of activists were gathered while journalist and activist Rasha Azab was being questioned inside. Civilians like Rasha were being tried, in the thousands, in military courts. The Ultra was chanting: Down with the Military Rule. I was impressed with his energy and internal force, especially in the heat of midday. I was melting in the sun while he never stopped chanting for the whole time that I was there. Hardly anyone back then dared chant against the military, or even dared have bad thoughts about the military. The military was the one that "saved the day," "saved the people from Mubarak," "safeguarded the revolution," etc. The Army of Egypt was sacred in the heads of Egyptians.

 


By early July many more were chanting against the military rule and were camped in Tahrir Square. Ultras were there too. One of them got me a tent to rest in on the first night while I was doing a Night in Tahrir story for Aljazeera about the sit-in. He stood outside the tent to make sure nobody would harm or bother me. Many female protesters told me they felt safer when Ultras were around because they were brave and were "real men.”


Now back to the present. So many Ultras are dead. Surprisingly -- or maybe not surprisingly -- from al-Ahly football club. Al-Ahly Ultras have been among the most vocal and most active revolutionaries. As the news travelled around the world about those Ultras being killed and injured, many probably thought: oh this was just another hooligans’ fight!

But in Egypt conspiracy theories and accusations grew louder and louder on TV stations and social media. Let's not forget that Egyptians have had quite an eventful week since 25 January 2012 when more people than ever before turned up at Tahrir Square. That was followed by a major bank robbery, clashes between protesters and Muslim Brotherhood supporters outside parliament, continued sit-in outside State TV, etc.

In the beginning of this video you can see clearly how security forces stood by watching while violence was breaking at the stadium. Such footage coupled with countless accounts by witnesses with details of how things turned ugly only came to emphasize people's doubts that the ultras may have been targeted. Whether or not that is true, the damage is already done. As the train from Port Said arrived at Cairo Station after 3 a.m., carrying some of the Ultras, including injured ones, their family members and friends were waiting to see who would come out of the train, alive. Some did come out, safe and sound. Others came out injured. But some did not make it! It was a very emotional moment. And thousands were gathered at the station.

The chanting was becoming louder and clearer:
"Either we get their rights, or we die like them,"
 "Down with the Military Rule," "The People Want to Execute the Field Marshall."





Minister Ghazi el-Aridi

Ambulances took the injured to hospitals while the Ultras marched on to Tahrir Square, a square they know very well, a square where they have survived many battles before and are ready for any new ones to come.

***

Lebanese MP and government minister Ghazi el-Aridi wonders in a write-up on Egypt for today’s edition of the UAE daily al-Itihad whether we are now watching the fire and brimstone of the revolution there or the revolution burning down. I suspect the former, at least until a new civilian president is duly elected later this year to succeed Mubarak.