After the movement of squares and marches in the streets calmed down, and the politicians and revolutionaries turned to political disputes with the Military Council or the government, or conflicts erupted between political factions, during the rule of the Military Council, and before the presidential elections, where the strength of the Islamists who participated strongly in the revolution appeared, when they organized and led the marches, as well as in the rapprochement that occurred between the Military Council and the Muslim Brotherhood, and the arrangements that followed the constitutional amendments referendum, which made the method of drafting the new constitution in the hands of the elected People’s Assembly, which came With an Islamic majority (Brotherhood, Salafism, and independent figures), the real weight of the secular movements in Egyptian society appeared, as they are a minority that do not have popular bases, and their discourse is elitist, multi-directional and ideas-based, but they are united in their hostility to the Islamic movement, and they see that the army is moving towards including the Islamists in power. From here, a shift occurred in the course of the revolution, and the ideological conflict began, recalling the old and accumulated stock of secularists’ hatred for the Islamists, and the Islamists’ rejection of the previous secular orientations of the authorities in Egypt. Many internal, regional, and external parties played on this chord, and the division of the national ranks increased, in light of the emergence of dozens of satellite channels, newspapers, and websites, which found support and support from local and regional forces, in order to ignite the fuse of the conflict, to eventually become a struggle over identity: identity. Secularism/Qatari/nationalism, or an Islamic identity with a civilizational reference. Without going into the details of this era, which occupied, exhausted, and consumed the revolutionaries and the masses, after the January Revolution, and throughout the period of the military council’s rule, which lasted a year and a half, including the era of the House of Representatives with an Islamic majority, and the conflicts, debates, and accusations that surrounded it, which deepened the hearts and distanced them from adopting a comprehensive national agenda, and made the issue confined to an intellectual-political struggle and fruitless quarrels, at a time when the arms of the military, regional powers, and remnants were tampering with security. And with the capabilities of the country. One of the phenomena of the conflict between the political forces was the preoccupation with questions such as: Who ignited the January revolution? Who joined her later? Who took advantage of it and rode its wave? These questions occupied many people, even if they were specifically concerned with the Islamic movement, while they remained silent about the recklessness of politicians and Mubarak’s cartoon parties. The secularists accused the Muslim Brotherhood of not making the revolution, but rather participating in it later, while the secular Islamists accused the secularists of this being an increase, and that they participated without a banner since the first days, and this is proven in dozens of videos, and that the issue Not among those who started, but rather among those who were patient, endured, saved the revolution in the Battle of the Camel, faced army armor with their bare chests, and offered many martyrs. On the other hand, the revolutionary debate did not address the fact that there were precursors to the revolution in Egypt, represented by peaceful protest movements, in which multiple political currents participated, including Islamists, secularists, partisans, and independent figures. It preceded the January revolution by years, such as the Egyptian Movement for Change (Kifaya), which included many cultural, literary, intellectual, and political symbols, and imposed a reality through its limited demonstrations, stops, and the great momentum it created in the street despite the restrictions of power. And tightening security, and along with it were other movements, such as the University Independence Movement (March 9), which included a large number of distinguished academics from various Egyptian universities, the Workers’ Movement for Change, the April 6 Movement, Youth for Change, Writers and Artists for Change, Journalists for Change, and many others. Its demands focused on freedoms, democracy, and protest against economic collapse, the sale of the public sector, the marginalization of broad segments of the people, and fraud in the general elections. The authorities used the stick. Security and arrests against members of this movement, which made its voice fade, before the January Revolution ([1]The National Association for Change expressed most of these national, Islamic and liberal movements, and if we consider the idea of change itself, which was associated with the names and slogans of these movements, we will find that it is the disturbing problem, after they found mummification from Mubarak and his men in their chairs, and that they plan to pass this system on to the son, with all its alliance of wealth with power, represented by the businessmen who assumed positions in the National Party and its policy committee headed by Gamal Mubarak, and also assumed the finance ministries. And service. These movements, despite their small numbers and the pursuit of them by the police, succeeded in creating an accumulation of anger and awareness in the hearts, and included in their members elements from many political movements, Islamic and secular, and independent figures, and this is what many ignore, until the 2010 elections came, to be the straw that broke the camel’s back, including falsification and disdain for the people in a blatant and sarcastic manner, and the memory still retains the sarcasm of the businessman and official of the National Party, “Ahmed Ezz,” where he mocked The opposition, followed by Hosni Mubarak in sarcasm, when he said about the shadow government: Let them have fun. It can be said that the culture of protest appeared during the last era of Mubarak’s regime, and the January Revolution came to complete its path. It is wrong for the debate to be about the ownership of the revolution, but rather it must be noted that the Islamists confronted the authority, and endured its cruelty, injustice, and war for many years, at a time when the majority of secularists enjoyed freedom of movement and support and support of the authority. This does not diminish the honest and sincere figures in the secular movement, which have all respect, and many of its symbols know that the Islamists supported them in the protest movements during Mubarak’s days through peaceful practices, such as: rebellion, resistance, sit-ins, strikes, and demonstrations, and they contributed to creating a new cultural, political, developmental, and national imagination, which was established by the January Revolution, and brought down the barrier of fear of the citizen, and put the people in a state of interaction and debate throughout the era that followed the revolution ([2]). Returning to the position of the Writers Union, the developments of the revolution and its outcome, we find that the political scene and the revolutionary ranks seemed very divided, after the referendum battle over the constitutional amendments, then the People’s Assembly elections, the intensification of the media discourse, and the fierce attack on the Brotherhood and all Islamists on the part of supporters of Mubarak’s state and the secularists with unlimited support from regional powers, which sought to sabotage the Egyptian revolution and nullify its influence. In this context, we monitor the statement issued by the Writers’ Union, entitled: The Constitution and the New Tyranny Committee, dated 3/25/2012, which states: “The Egyptian Writers’ Union strongly condemns the crooked, tyrannical behavior taken by the majority party in Parliament in forming the founding committee to draw up the constitution, which was keen for members of Parliament to hold 50% of its seats, and to personally choose the other 50% from outside Parliament, in violation of legal principles that do not recognize self-election. With his behavior, he betrayed the trust for which he was elected through democratic elections, which he had to maintain and adopt what supports the democratic practice through which he was elected. However, we found him resorting to the method of dictatorial tyranny that colored the performance of the dissolved National Democratic Party by seizing the committee seats. He had also previously seized the presidency of the parliamentary committees in a way that far exceeded his proportional representation in Parliament. The Writers Union had previously announced its complete rejection of such an approach that would make the founding committee lose its credibility, preferring that unions be established. The unions and civil bodies nominate those who represent them in this committee so that the members of the People’s Assembly and the Shura Council can elect whomever they see fit based on these nominations, in accordance with the Constitutional Declaration that gave the elected members of the People’s Assembly and the Shura Council the right to vote, but did not give them the right to nominate. In this context, the Egyptian Writers Union presented a list of ten names that included the greatest literary and intellectual figures on the Egyptian scene so that Parliament could elect whomever it saw fit, but the majority party, out of an arrogant sense of power, rejected the entire list and was not elected among them. Its founding committee includes one writer from within or from outside the list, neither among the main nor alternate members. This disgraceful beginning of writing the constitution, which should have been based on national consensus, and not on the tyranny of a fleeting parliamentary majority that rose to the demands of the masses, only foretells a constitution that is flawed and therefore lacks the elements of permanence. In this, Egypt’s writers, who are the conscience of the nation and its thinking mind, have a leadership role in mobilizing the masses to demand their natural right to a constitution that expresses all of us. It is not about a specific political trend that captured its majority amid exceptional, compelling circumstances that do not reflect the reality of the balance of political forces in revolutionary Egypt.”[3]). To discuss what was stated in this statement, we start from the last paragraph in it, which refers to a parliamentary majority, which is the Islamist bloc (the Brotherhood and the Salafists), which came with free elections that the whole world witnessed, but the Writers’ Union sides with what it called “exceptional, compelling circumstances that do not reflect the reality of the balance of political forces in revolutionary Egypt,” denying that the Islamists had anything to do with the revolution, supporting the common idea that the Islamists jumped on the revolution, and that is among the lies of the secularists and the remnants, which were promoted by corrupt media, A unilateral, tyrannical vision that dominates itself as a guardian over the people, and does not recognize what the democratic elections produced. This is one of the problems of some secularists in the Arab world, that they understand democracy as their freedom to say and attack as they please, especially attacking Islam and the Islamists, and that the arena be free for them, but if the elections bring in the Islamists, they are ready to ally with the military, the remnants, and Satan himself, and strive to restore the tyrannical state, provided that there are no Islamists in it, and no one talks about an Islamic authority. It is duality and corruption of standards, especially since the regime of July 1952 is essentially secular with a nationalist and socialist character, and it left these people a wide space in the movement. In the era of Hosni Mubarak, and during his struggle with the Islamists, he relied on the secular trend and gave them legitimacy in forming parties and associations. However, the first fair elections after a peaceful popular revolution brought an Islamic majority, and their real presence in the street was revealed. The position of the Writers Union is only a reaction to This is a painful result, because its board of directors is composed of a secular majority that does not allow any dissenting voice to be raised against it. Returning to the above statement, we find that the Union is putting itself in the intense battle of writing the constitution, and its events are known, but the Union repeats what the secularists are calling for, that representatives of unions, federations, and associations be elected to participate in preparing the constitution, and they ignore that the Constitution Drafting Committee must be directly elected by the people, and it was agreed that parliamentary elections will be held first, and then Parliament will elect the Constitution Drafting Committee secondly, so it will be of two levels, and in the event that the people reject the Constitution, it will be held. Direct election of committee members from the general public. Unfortunately, the Writers’ Union did not look at the democratic option and elections, but rather looked at the secular camp and those who support it from the remnants of Mubarak’s regime.
[1]) Class Struggle in Contemporary Egypt: Introductions to the January Revolution, Ahmed Bahaa El-Din Shaaban, Egyptian General Book Authority, Cairo, 2012, pp. 40-45.
[2]) The culture of protest from silence to disobedience, Dr. Shehata Siam, Egyptian General Book Authority, Cairo, 2012, p. 177.
[3]) Egyptian Writers Union website (old), access date 20/ 5/ 2019, http://egwriters.com/ar/?pg=pressReleases&item_id=205&page_id=6
