We recently received some bad news, in that the Egyptian courts acquitted the deposed President Hosni Mubarak of charges regarding his role in killing protesters on 25 and 28 January, as well as the days that followed until he announced he was stepping down on 11 February 2011. So will Mubarak be able to return to the authority he was stripped from if he is acquitted of all charges, including those of financial and political corruption and murder?
We cannot take this matter as a joke. If Mubarak was not a killer, corrupt or a tyrant, then why did the people revolt against him? Why did the army claim they were with the people during the revolution and claim the army and the people were one hand? If Al-Sisi had announced that he did not stage the 3 July coup for any personal reasons or interests and that his goal was Egypt’s interests, then why, since the honourable judiciary acquitted the deposed Mubarak of all charges, doesn’t Mubarak return to authority?
I will assume that Mubarak’s very skilled lawyer decided to present a case to the court demanding Mubarak’s reinstatement to the government that was stolen from him, as Al-Sisi claimed, and that authority is returned to Mubarak as he was acquitted of all charges directed against him. Of course his lawyer would also demand compensation for the years he spent in prison, and why would we rule out the possibility of Mubarak getting back his millions deposited in accounts in Switzerland’s banks? Isn’t this his right? Will Al-Sisi and his government dare to seize the money of an innocent man, according to the ruling of Egypt’s judiciary?
This scenario may not occur and I do not believe it will completely occur, although I do believe that some parts will occur, such as returning his money, honouring him or maybe having a military funeral for him when he passes away – and why not? Especially since Mubarak’s removal from authority was the reason it fell into the hands of Al-Sisi who is very loyal to those who are the reasons for his blessings. In my opinion, the story isn’t over yet. On the contrary, I believe it has just begun anew and started from the top just so no one imagines that the army are the deep state, the third party and the hidden manipulator. Today, this is no longer an imagined matter, but rather a clear fact.
The story has also started from the beginning for the people to be sure that the idea of freedom does not suit the military and that the story of the people and army being one hand is completely false. The army does not see the people or consider them, nor do the people see the army as a part of them, owned by them or affiliated with them, especially since the head of the army who staged a coup against his president is meeting secretly (I don’t know why secretly) with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Today the truth comes out. The military actually rescued Mubarak from the grip of the revolting people and allowed the people to channel their energy into democratic practices. Once they unloaded all of their energy, the military turned against the people once again, and this was predicted by Professor Hazem Salah Abu Ismail in one of his interviews on Al Jazeera Mubasher but no one believed him and thought his statements were illogical.
However, today we are the ones outside the limits of logic because we didn’t believe logic and history and instead believed the words of generals, none of whom reached their high ranks without immoral and unethical practices, and some even via illegal means.
The only advantage of what is happening today is that we are still witnessing it and the youth who staged the revolution still remember all of the events. Although some were killed, their archives are present within the nation, and this means that the military’s attempts to falsify facts will be met with the people’s ability to recall the events.
Moreover, the anger that was directed against Mubarak and his government has now been channelled against Al-Sisi and his generals and I do not believe Al-Sisi will be able to last long in the face of the people’s anger, according to most of the Western research centres’ analyses. Al-Sisi doesn’t have what Mubarak had and the people who overthrew Mubarak are not stronger than the people today, especially since the crises today are enough to spark a revolution for each, although it may be a late revolution.
So far I have spoken about Mubarak and Al-Sisi, but what about German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who visited Cairo last week? She also hosted Al-Sisi almost two years ago in Germany and it was an eventful meeting. The question is why did “democratic” Merkel ignore Al-Sisi’s criminal actions, starting with the coup and the brutal treatment of the people in terms of human rights?
The answer is that Europe and the West, the officials at least, believe in a democracy that allows them to control the reins of authority in our Arab countries and believes only in the freedom that makes them the only reference for what freedom is. Europe, and Merkel specifically, need another tyrant to control and manage their affairs in the manner they see fit, instead of having the Egyptian people come up with a leader who is free based on the standards of the people and not those of the West.
This in itself is dangerous, and Merkel, like US President Donald Trump and French President Francois Hollande, believes that a tyrant ruling a vital country is an investment in the future, especially if the West invades the Muslim world in a war Trump’s administration, especially White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon, is expecting and eagerly waiting for.
Merkel visited Egypt to secure investments amounting to over $8 billion; investments Germany’s Siemens company, which has been suffering a serious financial crisis, couldn’t have dreamed of. She also came to make sure Al-Sisi is killing immigrants passing through Egypt’s borders, as he did in the past. She even praised him in a press conference.
It is okay if some accuse her of supporting a dictator, as she only has to say, “Honey, all the leaders in the region are tyrants, so why stop at Al-Sisi?” If she was to ever say this, it would be a legitimate response.
Translated from Arabi21, 7 March 2017.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.