I write on the morning of Thursday. Today and tomorrow, the Supreme Committee for the Presidential Elections in Egypt will study some of the objections filed against certain candidates, and will decide on excluding those who do not meet requirements. But I hope that no de-Baathification in the Egyptian style will be practiced, in the sense of preventing figures from the former regime from running in the presidential elections, rather than excluding those who truly do not meet requirements. I also hope that the committee will be impartial with regard to the candidatures of Amr Moussa, General Ahmed Shafik and General Omar Suleiman. I understand when someone is excluded because of a conviction, but the exclusion of candidates because they are ‘symbols' from the Mubarak era means that those who won in the parliamentary and Shura elections want to replace one dictatorship with another. In particular, they want to impose their dictatorship on the entire Egyptian people, instead of letting the voters who voted them in decide whom they want to be the next President of Egypt. Even the founding committee for the constitution was not spared the attempt by one group to control it, in order to tailor the constitution to its own calculations. However, the committee was dissolved by judicial decision. There are other reasons to question the democratic credentials and credibility of some candidates. For instance, the Salafist candidate Hazem Abu Ismail denied that his mother holds U.S. citizenship, and continued to deny this even after official documents were published showing that she indeed is an American citizen, and is even registered as a voter in Santa Monica, California, since 25/10/2006. The evidence for or against him must no doubt be clear, and available to whoever wishes to see it. Is it possible that this man does not know that his mother holds U.S. citizenship? Can any sane person believe his claim that the New York Times is lying because its owner is Jewish? His claims reflect a level of ignorance that does not befit a potential president of Egypt, the mother of the world. An American paper like the NYT, the Washington Post, the Lost Angeles Times, or even a Likudnik paper like the Wall Street Journal does not fabricate news. News published by these newspapers is always accurate, usually verified from two independent sources, which is a tradition followed by major American papers. We read these newspapers every day, and our objection is not against their accurate news stories, but rather involves the op-ed contributors and commentators who include in their ranks American Likudniks or neocons who sell ‘their country' every day for the benefit of Israel. Once again, let the man understand. News is accurate and documented, while opinions may indeed range between impartiality and being toxic. I say this while not judging in favor of or against the Salafist candidate, and instead wait for the evidence. Hazem Abu Ismail not only made a denial; instead, when he was cornered, he attacked the supreme judicial committee of the presidential elections and the military council and threatened them both, so much so that even the senior leaders of the Freedom and Justice Party were compelled to criticize him publicly while secretly holding talks with Al-Nour Party to win over their support for the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, in exchange for choosing a member of the Salafists' party as Vice President. The Muslim Brotherhood also undermined public confidence in them. Indeed, they had announced time after time that the president would not be a member of the group, before nominating Khairat AlShater. Then when they feared that AlShater may be barred from running in the elections because of his convictions and prison sentences, they nominated at the very last moment Dr. Mohamed Morsi, the President of the Freedom and Justice Party, to guarantee that a member of their group will be running in the presidential elections. The Muslim Brotherhood announced that it has a comprehensive program to stimulate and solve the problems of the Egyptian economy. But I say that they will not be able to solve these problems in three or four years as they believe. To be sure, foreign currency reserves have vanished, tourism has plummeted, and foreign investments will not return except in a very smaller volume. The Arab countries that have the ability to help, have negative experiences with the Muslim Brotherhood in both Egypt and Syria, to say the least. This situation brings us back to what I started my article with, about the calls to exclude the ‘symbols' of the former regime. I speak only of what I personally know, and I say that I respect all the presidential candidates, but that I do not know many of them. The Arab leaders, from the Gulf to Morocco, do not know Hamdeen Sabahi, Mohamed Awa, Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, or Abu Ismail, AlShater Morsi and many others. For this reason, the one among them to win will need years before establishing relations of trust and direct cooperation with the other Arab leaders. On the other hand, Amr Moussa knows all Arab leaders, and they have dealt with him and they respect him. The same goes for Omar Suleiman. If either man goes to the Gulf, Morocco or Algeria, he would find officials that he knows and vice versa. This is not to detract from the ability of the other candidates, but only to state a fact, while reminding everyone that the Arab countries that are able to help Egypt wanted to host Hosni Mubarak after he stepped down, but he ended up on a stretcher in a dock inside a court. I say may God help you, our brothers and sisters in Egypt. [email protected]
