Sa’ad Al-Din Ibrahim: Either we reconcile with the Muslim Brotherhood or go to civil war

Dr Sa’ad Al-Din Ibrahim, the director of Ibn Khaldoun Centre for Developmental Studies and professor of Political Sociology at the American University in Cairo, has said that reconciliation between the ruling regime in Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood is inevitable in order to stop the haemorrhage taking place in the country. He stressed that the Muslim Brothers are political cadres and that conflict with them threatens to push Egypt in the direction of a civil war and threatens to turn matters to the worst.

He made the remarks in an interview with Al-Nabaa newspaper in this week’s edition.

Ibrahim outlined the reasons that prompted him to propose reconciliation between the Brotherhood and the regime. He said: “We are about to finalise the third objective of the road map, namely the parliamentary elections. However, building state authorities will not be complete without social peace. This in turn cannot be achieved without the resources of the Egyptian people.”

He went on to say: “We were told by the Brotherhood that those who did actually pay allegiance to the Murshid (Guide – or leader of the Muslim Brotherhood) number about 700,000, that is (we are talking about) 4 million people, that is if we reckon that each one of these individuals has with him (or with her) five or six other individuals. What should the state do with all of these? Should it wipe them out, or banish them or imprison them?”

He added: “The state should embrace these people one way or another. They are political cadres, and are not ignorant. Conflict with them will exhaust resources and shed the blood of citizens. It threatens us with a civil war and therefore reconciling with the Brotherhood is a must before matters develop into what is worst.”

Commenting on the reaction to his initiative, Sa’ad Al-Din Ibrahim said: “I am a person who cares for the public interest and never think in a stereotypical fashion. I knew my initiative was going to be attacked and that it would stir up storms. But I believe that when the storm subsides citizens will begin to ponder upon the idea of reconciliation. This will happen sooner or later, especially that the Muslim Brotherhood was subjected to an onslaught during the era of the monarchy, then during the times of Nassir, Sadat and Mubarak. In everyone of these eras there were reconciliations between the regime and this group whether explicitly or implicitly.”

Sisi may change his mind

Commenting on a statement made by Sisi in which he said that there would be no place for the Brotherhood, Ibrahim said: “President Abd Al-Fattah Al-Sisi sometimes says things but afterwards change his mind when new circumstances ensue. I firmly believe that the President will change his mind with regard to the reconciliation with the Brotherhood.”

The professor of political sociology stressed that reconciliation with the Brotherhood is ultimately inevitable, adding: “But we want this reconciliation to happen quickly so as to save time, effort and blood and in order to stop this war of attrition that is raging between the group and the regime.”

He went on to say: “Despite the difficulty of inflicting defeat upon the state in this confrontation, the prolongation of the conflict will incur more human and material losses in both sides.”

As for the Brotherhood refusal to reconcile with the Sisi regime and their insistence upon retribution and upon the return of President Muhammad Morsi, the director of Ibn Khaldoun Centre for Developmental Studies said: “The group has no choice but to accept reconciliation. If they do not accept it now, they will be forced to accept it afterwards.”

A yellow card for Sisi

And about the message the Egyptian people delivered to Sisi in terms of their weak participation in the parliamentary elections, Sa’ad Al-Din Ibrahim said: “The Egyptians showed Sisi the yellow card over these elections. I hope that he, in his capacity as a former intelligence officer – together with his aides and assistants, will comprehend this message well and will reconsider quickly.”

And about the shape of the next parliament, he said: “It will be a weak parliament since it was born out of a limited popular mandate. This will undermine the legitimacy of this parliament. For this reason I do not expect it to last long. It is possible for it to last for more than two years during which it will ratify a package of laws that were issued in accordance with republican decrees under the two presidents, the former Adli Mansour and the present Abd Al-Fattah Al-Sisi, let alone ratifying economic treaties.”

The role of the Brotherhood in the boycott was crucial

In his same interview, Saad Al-Din Ibrahim considered that the “in the love of Egypt” election list is “a pro Sisi coalition, that is parallel in its function to that of the National Democratic Party during Mubarak’s days, and therefore the members of parliament belonging to this list will constitute a pillar of support for Sisi (inside the parliament)”, as he put it.

Asked whether the Brotherhood played a role in convincing the people to stay away on election day, he said: “Yes, the Brotherhood had a very big role in the boycott.”

And about the shape of the parliament without the Brotherhood, he said: “It will be a parliament without colour, without taste and without smell. It will be the parliament of ‘yes’ men.”

Speaking about how representative the parliament will be of the revolution and the people, he went on to say: “Definitely, the next parliament will not be representative of the revolution or of the people. It will be representative of only a segment of the population and a segment of the revolution. Evidently, the youth of the revolution boycotted those elections, not in response to calls from the Muslim Brotherhood, which called for boycotting the elections, but because of their unjustifiable anger toward the regime.”

As for his analysis of Sisi’s onslaught on the media and his remarks about national alignment, he said: “Regarding the issue of national alignment, this is a military concept. Because Sisi was a military commander he is used to discipline. For this reason he seeks to turn the entire population into an extension of the army. This will not happen. Civilian life is different from military life.”

Assessing the human rights situation in Egypt, he said: “I am not happy about the situation of human rights liberties in Egypt … so long as there are prisoners without trial. I hope that the President will issue a complete pardon in favour of all those imprisoned and to open a new chapter of reconciliation. I also hope that all the laws that restrict and shackle freedoms are cancelled, those that were decreed in the absence of the parliament, foremost among them the law of demonstrations.”

Asked about which leads to the eruption of revolutions: the lack of bread or the absence of freedoms, he said: “Freedoms are the demands of the middle class, but bread is the demand of the lower class, which is the biggest class and the more brutal. Therefore, the lack of bread is more dangerous that the lack of freedom.”

Translated from Arabi21, 14 November 2015