Pages

Showing posts with label Hassan al-Banna. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hassan al-Banna. Show all posts

Monday, 9 July 2012

Morsy in Saudi Arabia: Brothers in Islam reconnect


Egypt's Mohamed Morsy and Saudi King Abdullah

Mohamed Morsy travels to Saudi Arabia Wednesday on his first official trip abroad as Egypt’s president amid hopes the visit would consolidate the two countries’ strategic political and economic partnerships and “restore Riyadh’s historic rapport with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.”
During his state visit, Morsy, a leading figure in the Muslim Brotherhood, will hold talks with King Abdullah and Crown Prince Salman and also perform the Umrah, the non-mandatory lesser pilgrimage to Mecca that may be performed at any time of the year.
Saudi Ambassador to Egypt Ahmed Qattan delivered King Abdullah’s invitation to Morsy last Saturday. Qattan said the visit would enhance bilateral relations in all domains.
A curtain raiser on the visit published today in the leading Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat says bilateral trade between the two states stood at $4.75 billion in 2011 while the value of Saudi investments in Egypt reached some $27 billion. The Saudi investments are in 779 Egyptian projects, of which 381 are in the mining and industry sector, 117 in agriculture, 156 in services and 94 in tourism.
Other revealing figures show Saudi Arabia hosting 1.7 million Egyptian expatriates (including Morsy’s son Ahmad, who is a medic based in Ahsaa).
At the same time, some 700,000 Saudis are residing or studying in Egypt, which draws another half a million Saudi tourists annually.
1936: Abdulaziz receives Banna (Asharq Alawsat)
In a flashback on Saudi Arabia’s relations with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Asharq Alawsat publishes a 1936 photo of King Abdulaziz Al Saud receiving Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna at a Muslim forum in the wake of the latter’s pilgrimage to Mecca.
The paper says when Banna asked King Abdulaziz if the Muslim Brotherhood could open a branch in Saudi Arabia, the monarch courteously ducked the question and responded, “We’re all brothers in Islam.”
Banna, the paper adds, later wrote in his diary, “Saudi Arabia incarnates the hopes of Islam and Muslims. It lives by the Quran, the Sunnah and the legacy of the righteous.”
Asharq Alawsat recognizes that “Saudi relations with Egypt’s Brotherhood had their ups and downs over the years but remained close despite the differences.”
A serious dip in relations between Saudi Arabia and Nasser’s Egypt (presumably over the 1962-1970 North Yemen Civil War) under King Feisal saw the kingdom open its doors to large numbers of Muslim Brothers.
Editorially, Egypt’s leading talk-show host and columnist Imad Adeeb, writing for Asharq Alawsat, says Morsy’s impending visit to the kingdom conveys five signals:
1.     Demise of the Mubarak regime, which had excellent ties with Saudi Arabia, and the transition to a “Brotherhood republic” won’t affect the mainstays of the Egyptian-Saudi partnership, which is based on facts and mutual interests rather than on specific individuals.
2.    Smart Saudi diplomacy was able to abort Iran’s drive to host Morsy on his first foreign visit as president before the conference of the Non-Aligned Movement in Tehran at the end of August.
3.     Heal the diplomatic spat over the Gizawi affair (See my April 26 post, “Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the suspected drug mule”).
4.     Allow Riyadh to gauge the Egyptian president’s views on three principal issues: (1) The export or dissemination of (Brotherhood) ideas and experiences abroad (2) The ruling Brotherhood’s position vis-à-vis Iran and (3) How the president intends tackling the Hamas, Hezbollah and Israel files.
5.     Determine the size of Saudi financial support Egypt needs to put its economic house in order, restore confidence in its markets and win back foreign investors.

Saturday, 7 April 2012

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?