The Egyptian Writers Union was established in exceptional circumstances, linked to the context of political and intellectual life in Egypt, at the beginning of the era of the seventies of the twentieth century, when Abdel Nasser disappeared, and Sadat assumed power and inherited a heavy legacy, represented by a humiliating defeat, the loss of Sinai land, and the near collapse of the Nasserist project, after everyone discovered: loyalists and opposition, the deterioration of ruling institutions, the dominance of trustworthy people, the deviation of the intelligence services, and the tightening of the security grip represented by the arrest and torture of opponents, and the phrase was “Visitors of Dawn” is frightening to the ears. Before the death of Abdel Nasser, the Egyptian state had changed, and the pace of opposition, represented by student demonstrations, intensified, and intellectuals, writers, and artists participated with it, which prompted the new authority to control any attempts to gather by writers and writers, especially after the demand increased for there to be a union, union, or gathering containing Egyptian writers, to express them. Therefore, the authority moved through its arms and followers in the cultural apparatus, and sought to establish the union, in application of the saying: “With my hand, not with my hand.” Amr, to have subordination and the upper hand over this entity, so that it does not escape its control, especially since it is difficult to control writers, and what they create and say. Therefore, it is important to read the circumstances that surrounded the emergence of the Union, as an example of how the totalitarian authority dealt with intellectuals and writers, especially since the Nasserist governments fought independent civil groups. We will review before the formation of the Union, then how it was established, and the circumstances that surrounded it, because understanding the beginnings will be a help in understanding the process and outcomes. What is striking about the structure of power in Egypt after the officers’ movement on July 23, 1952 AD, is that it established what is called the military state, and the army became directly responsible for civil life. The ruling president comes from the military institution, which supports him and follows up on the decisions and policies he makes, which do not conflict with the army’s position in power, nor its vision of the structure of governance. This situation has continued to this day, and the January 2011 revolution was the only opportunity that the Egyptian people had to get rid of the legacy of the military security system that Abd al-Assad established. Al-Nasser, and made it hereditary in the circle of power, and many of the men in power during the era of Sadat and Mubarak were linked to the Socialist Union and the Nasserite vanguard organization, or were linked to the security and intelligence services previously.[1]), meaning that the head of power changes, and the regime continues, reproducing itself, changing according to the changes occurring, through the institutions of the deep state: the police, the judiciary, the intelligence services, security and sovereignty, and many positions in the public sector, governorates, ministers, and major companies. It was made available to retired officers, regardless of their ranks; They held many positions in civilian life, after they reached retirement age, to obtain financial and job privileges in addition to the previous privileges they had obtained during their military service, and the same was true with police officers and other intelligence personnel. Many of them established their own investments, exploiting their influence and relationships with state agencies. On the other hand, the political life and parties that Egypt had in the royal era, which followed the European political system, based on competence in work, education, leadership, and performance, were nationalized. Any person who wants to rise to power must develop his own talents and abilities, in order to enter political life with its party rivalries, or so it should be. There is no doubt that there were many negatives surrounding the royal era, the way it was managed, and the formation of the political milieu in it, but it was definitely an era full of competencies. And the talents, patriots, men of finance, industry, and banks, who established national capitalism, along with an effective and active political life, taking into account the presence of the British occupation, and the authority of the king, who oscillates between the occupation and the masses. With the July military system, a new model of employee leaders emerged, whether officers, economists, technocrats, or engineers, who approached the Nasserist authority not because of their competence, but because they were trustworthy, satisfied with the ruling regime, and whose side was trusted. The National Union was also established, then the Socialist Union, and before them the Editorial Board, all of which were one political organization, including those selected from the military apparatus and those who supported them among the civilians, and thus power and politics were monopolized and confiscated.[2]). The Nasserist authority succeeded in finding supporters and defenders of it from writers and intellectuals, whether they were famous figures (notable figures), or from the middle class or below, and they all received benefits and privileges, and in return they were keen to defend the authority, against the rebellious groups and elements of writers, whose voices were raised in various creations, in articles, and also in demonstrations, at the end of the sixties and early seventies, and the voices of writers rose, demanding the establishment of a literary entity for themselves. The beginning of the rebellion was in the demonstrations of February 24, 1968 AD, which were organized by thousands of male and female students, and started from Cairo University, where they crossed the security barriers at the beginning of the road leading to the university bridge, chanting for the downfall of the light sentences issued by the military court against aviation commanders. The strength of the demonstration gradually intensified, as it broke through the next security fence located at the entrance to the university bridge, and the chants turned from sentences to order, from Such as: “Down with the rule of the unjust individual, down with the rule of the detention centers, life has become bitter… We want a free government, those who are oppressing us… and the Jews in Sinai, neither Sidqi nor the Ghoul… Abdel Nasser is responsible, no dictatorship after today, freedom… freedom, life has become bitter… We want a free press.” Other demonstrations also took place from Ain Shams University, Crowds of people and intellectuals joined both demonstrations. People were astonished when they saw noisy demonstrations in the streets of Cairo for the first time, as demonstrations were prohibited during the Nasserist era. On the other hand, more than a month later, specifically on March 28, the Board of Directors of the Judges Club issued its famous statement in which it called for freedom, democracy, and radical reforms in the system as a whole. No one expected this surprise that the judges unleashed, which they insisted on announcing, despite all the pressure exerted on them to postpone it, which forced Abdel Nasser to issue his new statement on March 30. The surprising thing about the judges’ statement was that they overcame the siege imposed on them, and printed their statement in the Al-Nasr Company for Export and Import, thus avoiding all eyes and tongues suspicious of them, and they were able to make the citizens hear their voice.[3]In January 1972, other demonstrations took place, demanding the liberation of the land, freedom and democracy. These are the same slogans that Sadat raised, although the security services had a different opinion, as they dealt harshly with the students and intellectuals participating in them. The important development was the convening of the Workers’ Culture Conference, and the emergence of the Committee for the Defense of Freedoms and Democracy. The issue of independent, non-state organizations was discussed at the conference, especially by leftist intellectuals, who greatly regretted the dissolution of the communist parties and their merger into the Socialist Union, which made them subordinate to the authorities and lost their independence. Intellectuals and writers called it “the sin of the left,” and how they had become a vehicle for power. They found that there is a generation of young writers who have supported the student movement since the end of the sixties, which intensified at the beginning of the seventies, demanding a literary entity that defends them and adopts their voice. Which prompted the authorities to try to contain the phenomenon, so the Youth Organization of the Socialist Union mobilized all its material and moral capabilities to hold the Zagazig Conference for Young Writers, in the year 1969 AD, in the wake of the student demonstrations the previous year. The conference brought together a huge number of writers from the regions and the capital, and the basic demand was to liberate the homeland and freedoms, in addition to the demands of writers that express their suffering, represented by the limited opportunities for publishing in newspapers and magazines, and the rigidity of censorship. Which they called for its abolition, the control of major writers (power writers) over cultural sites, and their intransigence against young people and what they publish. These young people formed the so-called phenomenon of the cultural generation of the sixties, in which important names subsequently shone, occupied cultural and official positions, and fell into the sin of tyranny in turn. This generation raised the slogan of revolution and change, against the generation of intellectuals, writers, and the left in the forties, who enjoyed power and positions, and they were writing lamenting the June defeat, and criticizing the regime, but it was a general, floating criticism. As for the generation of the sixties, their slogans were radical revolutionary, dreaming of the future, tomorrow, and freedom.[4]). The irony of the Zagazig Conference, in which the idea of the Writers Union germinated, was that Shaarawi Gomaa, Minister of the Interior, known for his extreme brutality, and Secretary of the Socialist Vanguard in the Socialist Union, was the one who adopted the idea of the Union, and sponsored the conference itself, which raised many question marks, because the Egyptian security services have offices to combat everything: communism, the press, theocracy (religious currents), progressive and reactionary, Palestinian, Arab and imperialist. At the conference, the Minister listened to all the cries, slogans, and demands about unleashing freedoms, hoping for a sound democratic life, and rejected the military bourgeoisie’s desperate attempt to mold the thinking of writers, monopolize their movement with the restrictions of authority, and censor their creativity and various writings. After the end of the conference, the Minister arrested a number of writers, but the most important gain for the Egyptian cultural movement was the slogan of forming the “Writers’ Union,” which continued for the next five years.[5]). Writers adhered to this demand as the cornerstone of the desired change, and the new, young generation was more enthusiastic about the establishment of the Union as the most comprehensive democratic expression of the intellectual and literary movement, to be a free platform for writers and immunity for the writer, and to represent all national and intellectual parties. They called for there to be a general conference for intellectuals with all their legitimate tendencies and contradictions, with members of the Union elected from among its ranks, in a true democratic manner, provided that it be free from all official connections with the Ministry of Culture. And the media, and the Socialist Union. Indeed, the hoped-for union would act as a pressure and control authority over official institutions. Its goal is to be a body that: plans, monitors, legislates, and implements cultural decisions. It can be financed through independent sources, such as the Judges Club, the State Council Club, and university faculty clubs, in a different movement that goes beyond the dull literary associations and clubs present in cultural life. These associations exist, but their general character is isolation from the political and intellectual reality, and their members hide behind dense curtains of academic, official, and entertainment work. About frank confrontation of painful reality. The reactions of intellectuals and writers to this step varied. The first trend feared that the hoped-for union would be a copy of the writers’ unions in the socialist bloc countries, that is, affiliated with the authority. The second trend saw that the existing association of writers was indispensable for this union, and it was managed by a number of writers close to the authority, most notably Saleh Jawdat, Abdul Aziz Al-Desouki, Suhair Al-Qalamawi, Abdul Rahman Al-Sharqawi, Alfred Faraj, Tharwat Abaza, and Youssef. Al-Sabai is the voice that expresses this trend. As for the third trend, it is from the old activists, who welcomed the idea but saw it as part of the Socialist Union. This trend was expressed by Muhammad Al-Khafif and Lotfi Al-Khouli. The surprise was that the Official Socialist Union issued the “National Action Program,” in which it called for the importance of having professional unions for writers and artists.[6]), and it was stated in the text: “Perhaps it would be appropriate for the Socialist Union to adopt the idea of establishing a general union that includes writers, political and legal writers, and a union for artists with their various specializations,” which forced honest writers to formulate a slogan: Towards an independent democratic union for Egyptian writers, and they also declared that they reject the guardianship of foxes (supporters of authority) over the vineyards (creative people), and that they are against cats (quails) taking over the affairs of mice (young writers)[7]).
[1]) Egypt’s Revolution: From the July Republic to the January Revolution, Azmi Bishara, Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, Doha, Qatar, 1st edition, 2016, vol. 1, p. 87.
[2]) The army and the national movement (Egypt, Vietnam, Pakistan, Indonesia, Japan, China, Congo), a team of researchers under the supervision of Dr. Anwar Abdel Malik, translated by: Hassan Qubaisi, Egyptian General Book Authority, Cairo, 2012, pp. 69, 70.
[3]) See in detail: The Generation That Confronted Abdel Nasser and Sadat: A Documentary Study of the Student Movement 1968-1977, Dr. Hisham Al-Salamouni, Jazirat Al-Ward Library, 2nd edition, 2016, pp. 252 et seq.
[4]) The counter-revolution in Egypt, Dr. Ghali Shukri, The Book of People, National Democratic Rally Party, Cairo, 1987, pp. 128-132.
[5]) Intellectuals and Military, Salah Issa, p. 421.
[6]) The Counter-Revolution in Egypt, pp. 133, 134.
[7]) Intellectuals and Military, p. 422.
