“First Impression”… A careful monitoring of political positions regarding the massacre of the Republican Guard
The twelfth chapter of the Documentary Encyclopedia of the Republican Guard Massacre, issued by the Awareness Foundation for Research and Development, headquartered in the British capital, London, begins to summarize the positions and statements documented by the encyclopedia that reflected the positions of states, bodies, parties, figures, popular movements, and civil organizations towards the massacre. It is the chapter to which we devote the following presentation: The encyclopedia has archived the data and reactions, along with their classification and original sources, on the websites of the entities they represent, and the role of the encyclopedia’s editors was limited to monitoring and classification, which is consistent with The nature of documentary work without analysis and expression of opinion, and here we will cite examples of the positions of political and popular forces inside and outside Egypt by reading the statements issued at the time, as they were expressive of the political and social context in which they occurred.
First: Political positions inside Egypt
The encyclopedia presented three types of reactions that took place inside Egypt, including the coup group in all its sects, the group rejecting the coup in all its sects, and the independent union and popular bodies produced by the revolution and independent figures, examples of which we will present in the following lines. A. Alliance of the forces of June 30 and July 3, 2013. The June 30 coalition, which resulted in the July 3, 2013 coup, consisted of several basic components, whether those who were in the cockpit of the coup or those who were performing logistical services in the media, in mosques, or in all the various sectors of society that appeared in the scenes of the June 30, 2013 demonstrations. The first thing the reader notices about the symbolism of the image in which the statement of the military coup is read, which includes fifteen military, religious, and party figures, is the appearance of a military triangle in the heart of the image. (The frame), the vertex of this triangle is (Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the leader of the coup), the right side is (Lieutenant General Abdel Moneim al-Terras, commander of the Air Defense Forces), and the left side is (Lieutenant General Sedqi Sobhi, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces). It is also noted that the number of those wearing military uniforms is seven people representing sectors of the armed forces, and they were distributed in a way that made the Patriarch of the Church and the Sheikh of Al-Azhar – on the right side – sit between two military leaders, and the same applies to (Counselor Hamid Abdullah, President of the Supreme Judicial Council and President of the Court of Cassation) and (Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, Head of the Constitution Party and General Coordinator of the Salvation Front) on the left side. The picture gathered in the first row, arranged from right to left, the following: Major General Younis Al-Sayyid Hamid Al-Masry – Commander of the Air Forces, Bishop Tawadros II (in the name of Wajih Sobhi Baqi Suleiman) – Patriarch of the See of Mark, Dr. Ahmed Mohamed Ahmed Al-Tayeb – Sheikh of Al-Azhar, Major General Abdel Moneim Ibrahim Bayoumi Al-Terras – Commander of the Air Defense Forces, Lieutenant-General Sidqi Sobhi Sayyed Ahmed – Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, Counselor Hamid Abdullah – President of the Supreme Judicial Council and President of the Court of Cassation, Major General Osama Ahmed Ahmed Al-Jundi – Commander of the Naval Forces Dr. Mohamed Mustafa El-Baradei – Head of the Constitution Party and General Coordinator of the Salvation Front. The photo also gathered in the second row, arranged from right to left, the following: Mohamed Abdel Aziz – Political Communications Officer of the Sakina Tamarod Movement Gamal Fouad – Journalist Jalal Marra – Secretary-General of the Salafist Nour Party Major General Mohamed Saeed Al-Assar – Assistant Minister of Defense for Armaments Affairs Major General Mahmoud Ibrahim Hegazy – Director of Military Intelligence Mahmoud Badr – Founder of the Movement Rebellion and the importance of the July 3rd statement and its connection to the Guards Club massacre and the massacres that followed; The document focused on the contents of this statement, the scene of its recitation, and the image that expresses it. I mentioned the text of the statement, described the scene of its recitation, and discussed its content in detail.
2- Political forces
. Salvation Front:
These are groups of parties affiliated with what was known as the Salvation Front, which is a front that brought together most of the losers in the 2012 presidential elections and the party losers in the constitutional entitlements in the People’s Assembly, the Shura Council, and the Constitution Committee. This front was established with full coordination and arrangement by the security authorities, as stated by some of its symbols and those who later dissed from it, and it was the line that the deep state used as a political cover that paves the way for the seizure of power. The Salvation Front condemned “all acts of violence… and any attempt to attack military installations and armed forces personnel,” and demanded an urgent investigation. This is a vague general condemnation that equates the killer with the murdered and did not last long over time. The demand for an investigation was not repeated, and the positions of the components of the Salvation Front, including parties and independents, quickly identified with the coup authority, especially after some of its figures were selected for high-ranking positions in the coup authority, such as the appointment of Dr. (Mohamed ElBaradei) as the designated vice president of the republic, and Some of them were ministers, and their services were quickly dismissed later. It was noticeable that the more killings of protesters increased, the more the components of the Salvation Front supported the coup authority, which is strange in terms of positions and principles.
. April 6 Movement:
It called on President-designate Adly Mansour to form an independent investigation committee immediately, and called on the armed forces to exercise restraint and disperse the sit-ins without excessive force. It later appeared that this statement was for media consumption, to prove political presence, and to please some of the movement’s masses and nothing more, which was later indicated by the confession of one of the leaders of April 6 (Ahmed Maher) in a detailed article from his prison afterwards entitled: “Unfortunately, I knew”!! Some of them participated – as in some of the testimonies – side by side with the thugs in attacking the demonstrators and sit-ins and directly assisting the security services. However, the movement modified its positions and took a distance from the authorities, and tried to justify its previous position, then moved to apologise, but it entered the maze of lining up against the military rule, on the condition of ruling out the return of President Morsi, not raising the Rabaa slogan, and sharp criticism of the Brotherhood, which made its position on the military rule more ambiguous and less bold than before. It was like this before, during, and during the era of President Morsi.
. The Salafist Call and the Nour Party:
أعلن حزب النور الموصوف بالسلفي انسحابه من خارطة الطريق التي أُعلِن عنها في بيان الانقلاب، ووقف التفاوض حولها كرد فعل أولي على “مذبحة الحرس الجمهوري”.
ويبدو أن هذا هو أقوى المواقف في تحالف 3 يوليو، وقد أدى موقفه هذا إلى عودة الأجواء التفاؤلية للجمهور السلفي ولبعض كوادر حزب النور المعارضين لبيان الانقلاب، وصار الموقف مادة للنقاش والجدل بين المعتصمين الذين كان يرى بعضهم أنه مناورة لكسب الحاضنة الشعبية الآخذة في التراجع، في حين رأى آخرون أنه موقف إيجابي يمكن البناء عليه، وكان لكل رأي مؤيدوه من السلفيين ومن الإخوان وبقية تحالف دعم الشرعية… ولكن الحزب ذا النزعة السلفية الشكلية المتشدِّدة عاد وفسر موقفه تفسيرا فيه تراجع كبير عن هذا الموقف واستمر تراجعه حتى وصل إلى حد التطابق مع السلطة الانقلابية والتماهي معها فيما تلا ذلك من مذابح وكوارث، وتوجيه معارضته وغضبه ونقمته ضد الضحايا وعلى رأسهم الإخوان وحزب الحرية والعدالة دون سواهم، إلا ما كان يطلب منه من مناورات أخرى مثل موقفه المتشدد من الدكتور البرادعي عند عرض مشاركته في الحكومة الانقلابية برئاسة الببلاوي!!
ومن العجيب أن هذا الحزب الموصوف بالسلفي الذي كان يبدي تشددًا في بعض العبادات وجدناه مفرطًا في القضايا الكبرى؛ مثل: الدماء (كما يظهر للمتابع في مواقفه من المذبح الأخرى) والأعراض (كما في فتوى برهامي المثيرة للجدل) والأرض (كما في قضية تيران وصنافير) وكثير من المواقف المخزية التي كان يسبق فيها السلطة الانقلابية أحيانا.
. حزب مصر القوية:
أصدر حزب مصر القوية بيانًا أدان فيه قتل المتظاهرين أمام دار الحرس الجمهوري، وحمّل البيان القوات المسلحة مسؤولية عدم حفظ دماء المصريين، كما علق الحزب مشاركته في بحث كيفية تنفيذ خارطة الطريق السياسية للبلاد، وطالب الرئيس المعين عدلي منصور بالاستقالة فورًا؛ احتجاجًا على “المذبحة”.
ومع أن حزب مصر القوية ذا التوجه الليبرالي مع لمسة إسلامية – كان يعمل في الحديقة الخلفية لتحالف 30 يونيو- إلا أنه كان أكثر ثباتا في إدانة عمليات القتل الجماعي التي جاءت بعد ذلك، ولم يتطابق مع موقف السلطة تطابق حزب النور الذي أشرنا إليه منذ قليل بل كان يبتعد عن السلطة بعد كل مذبحة أكثر فأكثر.
3- Religious authority
They represent – at this time – the religious arms of the deep state, some of whose leadership is closely linked to the security services that appoint guards for them, provide them with advisors, and bestow upon them enormous populist and security sanctity, and it can demonize them in a few days if it wants! This authority was represented by the sheikhs of Al-Azhar, the patriarchs of the Orthodox Church, some Salafist leaders, some remnants of the dismissed Brotherhood, and some Sufi sheikhs – these people expressed this style blatantly. This stereotypical category brings together the highest ladder of extremism and alienating religious and sectarian extremism, as well as the lowest swamp of religious and moral deviation. In this mold, you find followers of the official religious authority, and they are rarely absent from an influential security companion. Either a threat, a promise, or a threat. For example; The Sheikh of Al-Azhar (Dr. Ahmed Al-Tayeb) called for the formation of a national reconciliation committee, and said that he finds himself “forced, in this atmosphere that smells of blood, to isolate myself in my home, until everyone bears his responsibility for stopping the bloodshed, to prevent the country from being dragged into a civil war that we have always warned against falling into.” This statement did not have any impact on the tense political or social situation, and it seems that he tried to take a step similar to what the Patriarch takes when something bad happens to Christians and he sees that the authorities have not done enough to protect them! This is an advanced step – no doubt – by the Sheikh of Al-Azhar, and it may not be acceptable in any form to an authority that considers religious leaders a pawn to tickle the feelings of the masses and a tool for political use! We do not yet know whether the statement of the Sheikh of Al-Azhar resembles the statement of the Nour Party in that he announced withdrawal (and the Sheikh announced seclusion) and then quickly returned to surrender under military orders, and whether this rapid return was a voluntary, coordinated process for the sake of sounding maneuvers to measure popular and international reactions to the massacres, or was it a real protest and then the Sheikh was threatened and oppressed! for. The legitimate authority and the parties supporting it. The legitimate authority was not in a state that allowed it to take any effective action. Its reactions were divided into several angles, as follows:
1- President Mohamed Morsi is the head of the executive authority
The legitimate president, Mohamed Morsi himself, was subjected to enforced disappearance two days before the massacre was committed. He had warned in his last speech, a historic speech in which he described the events and outcomes that might lead to the use of armed force to seize power. He called on the armed forces to withdraw their warnings and threats, warned of the consequences of a coup against legitimacy, and appealed to all Egyptians to spare bloodshed. He expressed his complete readiness to sacrifice his life in defense of legitimacy. He also called for the necessity of preserving the army, the police, the judiciary, and the commitment to Peaceful and preserving institutions, he appealed to the authorities that legitimate and constitutional change, in accordance with the road map that was approved by the consensus of all forces, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense, is the only guarantee for preserving youth, women and children, the unity of society and the democratic path (YouTube, 2013).
2- The Council of Ministers
Prime Minister Dr. Hisham Qandil – an independent technocrat who is not affiliated with the majority party or the Muslim Brotherhood – was surprised by the military coup, especially after President Morsi approved the road map, which included in its terms the resignation of the prime minister, the appointment of a prime minister approved by all parties, the empowerment of youth, the implementation of community reconciliation, and the formation of a national coalition government… – The reason for the surprise was that the one who was mediating between the government and the opposition was the Minister of Defense, who promised, more than once, that there would be no change except through the democratic path, but then he did. Who is leading the military coup!! The Prime Minister continued to carry out his work after the statement of the coup, “taking into account the interests of the country and the people,” as he said, while declaring his rejection of the statement without paying attention to the media, which had previously launched a major smear campaign against him months before the coup. After the news of the massacre spread, Qandil submitted his resignation to the people, as he said, because he was unable to carry out his job and political duties. The massacre at the Guard House was the main reason, and he published his resignation letter to the people, saying: “This has become practically impossible after the blood that was shed.” A group of ministers in his government sided with legitimacy and submitted their resignation. Some of them were independent, such as: the Minister of Justice (Ahmed Suleiman) and the Minister of Endowments (Talaat Afifi), and some of them were partisan, such as ministers belonging to the Freedom and Justice Party, such as the Minister of Supply and Internal Trade (Bassem Odeh) and the Minister of State for Youth Affairs. (Osama Yassin), the Minister of Information (Salah Abdel Maqsoud), the Minister of Manpower (Khaled Al-Azhari), the Minister of State for Local Development (Mohamed Ali Bishr), the Minister of Investment (Yahya Hamed), and the Minister of Planning and International Cooperation (Amr Darrag). This group went directly to the sit-in squares and symbolically descended on the streets in solidarity with the angry crowds rejecting the coup and all its outcomes. Other ministers from the Wasat Party, such as the Minister of Trade and Industry (Hatem Saleh) and the Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs (Ahmed Issa Ahmed), joined in their position in solidarity with them. The Minister of Culture (Alaa Abdel Aziz – Arab Tawhid Party) also resigned. Another team from the Qandil government sided with the coup from the first moment, headed by the Minister of Interior (Mohamed Ibrahim), the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Mohamed Kamel Amr), the Minister of Finance (Fayad Abdel Moneim Hassanein), in addition to the leader of the military coup, the Minister of Defense and Military Production (Abdel Fattah Khalil El-Sisi). There was a group that was hesitant and waiting for the situation to be clarified, such as: the Minister of Tourism (Hisham Zaazou) and others, and these people were retained by the coup authority in their positions after that when they remembered that there was another authority that existed other than the Ministries of Defense and Interior, called the Ministries of Defense and Interior. cabinet!! This situation applies completely to the various levels of the ladder of power, including the heads of the various judicial and executive authorities, including senior judges, governors, deputy ministers, and others. What is notable is that the bulk of these authorities did not belong to the majority party, nor to the Muslim Brotherhood, nor to the parties allied with them, which is the opposite of the propaganda that prevailed during the stage of preparing the people for the military coup.
3- The National Alliance to Support Legitimacy
When some political forces felt the fragility of legitimate authority in the face of the coup and the deep state; Before the coup, specifically in June 2013, they formed an alliance among themselves to support legitimacy, which they called (the National Alliance to Support Legitimacy) (Wikipedia, 2013), and when the coup occurred, its name became (the National Alliance to Support Legitimacy and Reject the Coup). The coalition aimed to form a broad national front to confront the coup steps undertaken by the deep state in alliance with regional and international powers to retreat from the January 25, 2011 revolution and its gains, and to coordinate with the army and intelligence away from the legitimate president elected by the people, the government appointed by him headed by Hisham Qandil, and the democratically elected Shura Council (which is the only representative chamber that escaped the successive coup judicial solution of the Supreme Constitutional Court, which was a sword). Shedding light on every popular choice after the success of the January Revolution. The coalition included a group of parties: Construction and Development, Freedom and Justice, New Labor, Virtue, Reform, Arab Unification, the Islamic Party, Homeland, the Center, Authenticity, and the People, and a group of non-partisan revolutionary and social forces, namely: the Council of Trustees of the Revolution, the Federation of Professional Syndicates, which includes 24 unions, the Al-Azhar University Student Union, the Arab Tribes Union Coalition in Egypt, the Labor Arms Center, the General Association of Street Vendors, and retired officers. And veterans (Al Jazeera Net website, 2014), and political and professional groups with different orientations continued to join the coalition to support legitimacy, including: independent Christians, students against the coup, women against the coup, journalists against the coup, judges against the coup, and others.
C. Civil society institutions
Egyptian civil society institutions such as professional unions, civil society associations, student unions, faculty clubs, human rights associations, social associations, etc. Anyone who follows the activities of these institutions will find that they enjoy a fair amount of vitality, and they also enjoyed a degree of trust and social acceptability among Egyptians in the twenty years preceding the revolution. It has demonstrated a high ability that enabled it to contain the harmful effects on the Egyptian social structure, and this was represented in its ability to contain the material and moral damage in the event of the absence of the state – intentionally through corruption or negligence due to weak administrative efficiency – from carrying out its duty. These institutions have demonstrated a popular and professional presence, given that most of them were truly elected institutions, and express the middle class that maintains the balance of society. The role of these institutions has been clear throughout their history. They carried out their duty in dealing with the effects of the January 25, 2011 revolution before, as well as in the massacres carried out by what was called the third party (during the period of the military council). We saw them in many situations that occurred in Egyptian society before the January Revolution, such as: the fall of the Pharaoh’s Rock in the Al-Duwayqa area, and before that its noticeable activity in the wake of the earthquake that struck Egypt in the 1990s. Its role in this incident became prominent, as it held several popular and specialized conferences to research the causes of the Guards Club massacre and determine responsibility for it. Most importantly, it took practical measures to help the victims, including the martyrs, as well as the injured and detainees, compensate them, care for their families, and attempt to compensate for the material, moral, and psychological damage to everyone who was harmed, regardless of their party, political, or religious affiliations (Yaqin News Network, 2013). This position was taken by most of the large unions, such as the unions of doctors, engineers, pharmacists, scientific, commercial, veterinary, applied, teachers, the Federation of Professional Unions, faculty clubs, as well as civil and Christian associations. These institutions were punished, placed under guard, dissolved, suspended, or frozen, during the first year of the coup, and the coup authority treated every union or civil body according to its position on this massacre, so it began to destroy civil society institutions and paralyze them completely after the Guards Club massacre, accusing them of being affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Based on the repressive measures taken by the authorities, as well as black media propaganda; The role of these institutions weakened and withered, especially after the major shock in the mother of massacres (the Rabaa al-Adawiya massacre). In a position contrary to the previous position; A few took some boards Unions have opposing positions, such as accusing the protesters, supporting the killing machine, and fighting efforts to reveal the truth. These include the administration of the Bar Association (where Captain Sameh Ashour was one of the leaders of what was known as the “Salvation Front” and was biased towards the coup and justified all its crimes), the Journalists’ Syndicate, the Syndicate of Acting Professions, some judges’ clubs, and police officers’ clubs, as well as what is known as independent unions.
D. Independents (public figures and political groups)
كانت إدانة بعض الشخصيات والمجموعات السياسية المستقلة واضحة وقوية، وإن لم تنضم لتحالف دعم الشرعية، فقد شاركت بعض كوادرها في اعتصام رابعة العدوية.
ومن أبرز الشخصيات المستقلة التي أصدرت بيانات قوية تعليقًا على المذبحة وواجهت مشكلات بسبب ذلك؛ الدكتور حسن الشافعي (مستشار مشيخة الأزهر ورئيس مجمع اللغة العربية)، والدكتور محمد الجوادي (المفكر والمؤرخ المصري) والدكتور محمد سليم العوا (أبرز رواد الحوار الوطني المصري) والدكتور محمد عمارة (الداعية والمفكر الإسلامي)… الذين أدانوا المذبحة وأكدوا أن 3 يوليو يتخذ مسار الانقلاب الكامل الأركان على السلطة الشرعية، وطالبوا الشعب والمؤسسات بالتكاتف لوقف هذا الانقلاب بصورة سلمية تجنب البلاد الوقوع في أتون الحرب الأهلية أو التمزق الاجتماعي.
ومن أبرز المجموعات السياسية المستقلة (الاشتراكيون الثوريون) التي أصدرت بيانًا وصفت فيه ما قامت به القوات المسلحة بأنه “مذبحة دموية” ووصفته بـ”القمع الوحشي” وجعلت دافعه “ترسيخ القبضة العسكرية” ودعت إلى القصاص.
ه. الناجون من المذبحة
كما أصدر الناجون من المذبحة بياناً للتنديد بما اقترفته قوات الجيش والشرطة أمام مبنى الحرس الجمهوري، حيث أطلقت الرصاص الحي والخرطوش على المتظاهرين السلميين.
And. The most prominent effects of the massacre inside Egypt:
One of the most prominent results of this massacre was that two clear groups emerged in Egyptian society: one group supported the coup and all its outcomes, and another group completely rejected it and all its effects. The massacre did not allow anyone to maneuver, so some forces preferred to completely disappear and dissolve over time in which events crowded together and multiplied, and those who remained in the political presence either because they were with legitimacy or because they were with the coup.
Second: International positions
The international position was characterized by three general trends at the time of the massacre, and there are many details that we leave to the readers and to history in the archives of the document, so that researchers can attempt to interpret and analyze them afterward, and the following is a summary of those positions: A. Explicit condemnation, describing the event as a massacre, and demanding an investigation. Some countries and bodies condemned the horrific massacre, denounced it, and held the coup authority directly responsible for it and for all the blood. This was the position of the State of Turkey, as the Turkish Foreign Minister, Ahmed Davutoglu, condemned the events of the Republican Guard, which resulted in the killing of at least 42 people, at dawn on Monday, describing the matter as a “massacre,” and called for the start of a political consensus process that respects the will of the Egyptians. He also described what happened in Egypt as a full-fledged military coup. South Africa, the Republic of Tunisia, and the African Union also did the same, and the latter decided to freeze Egypt’s membership in the union, demanded an immediate independent investigation, and actually formed an African committee to investigate. In the same context, the Secretary-General of the United Nations issued a statement in which he condemned the killings, called for investigations by independent and competent national bodies, stressed the need to bring those responsible to justice, and warned Egyptians of what he described as “the fragile path towards which the country is heading.” The Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization also called for an urgent investigation into the events, which it described as a criminal operation that must be condemned and those who caused it must be punished with the most severe penalties. for. Accepting the narrative of the coup authority and sometimes justifying it and accusing the victims. There is a group of countries that were prepared to fully accept the narrative of the authority and justifying it and accusing the victims, with some timid statements calling for non-escalation and restraint, and they varied among them for political and logistical reasons. While it condemned acts of violence with a vague generalization; It held the protesters responsible for it, and attacked the Muslim Brotherhood, at the forefront of which were Israel, the United States, and the countries sponsoring the coup financially and politically, represented by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and the countries that fell under their influence. The US State Department, through its official spokeswoman, Jennifer Psaki, called on the Egyptian army to adhere to the utmost levels of restraint, stressing the need for all sects to participate in the democratic transformation in Egypt. It also condemned in the same context the Muslim Brotherhood’s call to adopt violence as a means of expression. (Arabiz RT website, 2013, August 8) There are other countries that condemned the killing and acts of violence, but they equated the killer with the victim, which is represented by the positions of And statements by officials in Russia and most European countries. C. Waiting for the truth to be clarified. Some countries and bodies chose to wait in declaring their position, waiting for the truth to be clarified from reliable sources. This is represented by the Qatari position, where the State of Qatar announced that it is closely following the current events, while the government agencies there have refrained from making any statements regarding the events until the vision is completely clear. This was also represented by the German position, as the German Foreign Ministry expressed its dissatisfaction with the acts of violence witnessed by Egypt, calling on neutral parties for a quick clarification of the circumstances of the events, as well as the position. Palestinians, both in the West Bank and Gaza, and the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) announced great sadness and pain over the Egyptian casualties. But after a period of time, the massacres continued; The positions of those countries and bodies crystallized, and they explicitly and strongly condemned all the massacres that followed the massacre of the guards. They expressed their shock, and their positions varied after that regarding the authority of the coup. Some countries chose to remain silent, waiting for the positions of the major powers and the central powers in the region to become clear. (Youm 7 website, 2013, August 8).
Introduction to the institution
The importance of scientific investigation and condensation of the narrative and documentation of this massacre lies in the large number of repercussions it had, whether in the number of martyrs, injured, and detainees, or in the reactions of the local and international community. Because it represented a clear political change in the course of the coup leaders’ dealing with the red lines of the January 25, 2011 revolution, transgressing all the taboos of the revolution, and daring to demolish its most important gains, which are the freedom of assembly, demonstration, and sit-in. “Awareness Foundation for Research and Development” is an independent scientific body that cares for all types of knowledge related to building individual and collective awareness. It is not limited to analyzing and anticipating the future in scientific, political, economic, and other issues, but rather makes history, documentation, monitoring, and blogging platforms a prominent axis of its launch. The driving motive for creating this ambitious project is an integrated, civilized institutional vision for humanity in the twenty-first century, a vision that seeks life in the best possible ways and raises the importance of the basic values and principles common to human beings. The Foundation is committed to publishing facts and monitoring events, and in doing so it respects specialization, addresses issues objectively, takes into account intellectual diversity and natural difference, and recognizes the value of the human being who has been honored by his Creator and appointed as successor on earth. In doing so, it seeks to meet the need of society in its various segments to spread culture, awareness and understanding among the general public and not among the elite alone.