Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

Egyptian journalist: The revolution was not about Israel

With very few exceptions, the protesters who toppled Hosni Mubarak did not even mention Israel during their 18-day revolution.  Even now, with post-revolutionary populism slightly on the rise, there is no-one, from anywhere on the political spectrum, who wants to abrogate the peace agreement. At the worst, Israel can expect the cold peace to become slightly chillier

By Mohamed El Dahshan

There was a “Down with Mubarak!” sign in Hebrew or two. With grammar mistakes, too. The implicit – and sometimes not so implicit – joke was that Mubarak was an Israeli agent and couldn’t read the signs ordering him to leave in Arabic.

In Tahrir, a sign that says in broken Hebrew, 'the entire nation wants the president to fall.' (photo: Mohamed El Dahshan)

And on January 25, the very first day of protests when demands were still unclear, there was a single banner deploring the export of Egyptian natural gas to Israel via a multinational consortium – the main criticism of that agreement being that the deal was signed in 2005 and fixes export prices at a fraction of today’s market prices. I don’t recall having seen any other such sign since.

But this aside, Israel was almost nonexistent throughout the eighteen days of the revolution, whether out on the square on in pundits’ discussions in Egypt.

In Israel, understandably, as well as in the US – where the government has struggled to speak a lot on the subject to say nothing – concerns ran high on the future of Egyptian-Israeli peace. But I can assure you, in Tahrir Square, that was the furthest thing from our minds.

The revolution was leaderless – and as such, there was no room for cheap populism or hateful speech to extract an extra cheer or two from the crowd. The people in Tahrir Square, in Suez, in Alexandria, and across the country were out there for more imminent reasons: Police brutality; corruption; poverty; and inflation. The absence of decent health care and education. “Bread, freedom, human dignity!” went one of the core chants that lived throughout the eighteen days of protests. The grievances were deeply personal, not ideological.

The demands escalated as attacks from the government police and thugs were fended off one after the other. But they were never about foreign policy. They were about justice, human, social and economic rights. The chants were sincerely unitarian; the message unequivocally positive. People demanded what was theirs – and with that, they demanded the cause of their grief to be removed.

It’s only in the post-revolutionary phase that Israel is becoming a part of the public discourse; a little populism is to be expected in these times of political uncertainty and regaining popular interest of the public matters, as we’ve already begun to see.

Liberal opposition leader Ayman Nour’s declarations on February 14 to a Lebanese television network are a case in point. His statement that “the Camp David accord is, in effect, over” needs to be viewed in this context. Not only is Nour out fishing for popular support, after his and his party’s have plummeted in the past years, but this statement was immediately preceded by “we believe that we should uphold our international engagements.”  He also said that “Camp David needs to be developed in a proper fashion – there are elements in it that are unfair to the Egyptian side.” For many, including myself, the limitations the agreement puts on Egypt’s deployment of its armed forces on its own soil are indeed unfair and could benefit from a review. But this remains very far from an intention to terminate the peace agreement or to resume hostilities with Israel. There is no-one, across the political spectrum, who wants that.

Netanyahu’s worries, and his feeble show of support for Mubarak, were misplaced because they were unnecessary.  In fact, they were assuredly counterproductive: a vote of confidence from the Israeli government does not help score popularity points with the Egyptian public.

As protesters in Tahrir gathered on Friday the 18 for the weekly prayer, they were led by Sheikh Youssef El Qaradawi, a conservative imam with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood who has, for decades, been a vocal opponent of the Mubarak regime and was consequently banned from Egypt. He is now serving as president of the World Union of Islamic scholars in Qatar, and he has taken Qatari citizenship. His speech focused on corruption, reform, the role of the army and the need for a new government. Only a few sentences around the end of his 30-minute sermon were dedicated to foreign issues – namely, Palestine. “Open the Rafah border crossing that separates us from our brothers in Gaza,” he said, addressing the army. “Egypt, that has fought four wars for Palestine, must be its shield.”

After the prayer the crowd joined briefly in a chant of “to Jerusalem we go, even if we are martyred by the millions” – which many outside observers have erroneously construed as a regain of belligerence towards Israel. What it was, however, was a decibel level fight – between the Islamist and the secular movements. What the brief YouTube clip of those chants did not show, however, is that for every person clamoring an ‘Allah Akbar,’ two would raise their voice in a ‘Viva Egypt’ or ‘Be proud for you are Egyptian.’ The ‘Palestine’ and ‘Jerusalem’ elements of those chants were just accessories. Besides, those chants have always been a part of pro-Palestinian demonstrations – and no one has yet started walking toward Jerusalem. The rest of the day was celebratory and mournful for the lives we lost. It was not about Palestine, and the Qaradawi speech was also heavily criticized in the following days for attempting to shift the debate on foreign issues, if only for a minute.

Realistically speaking then, a change in Egypt’s Palestinian policy is to be expected. The previous government’s collusion with Israel on issues such as the blockade of Gaza is likely to end in favor of a relaxation of the Rafah border control conditions. With the foreseen participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in the next elected parliament, Egypt will also be less likely to tow Israel’s line on the rejection of Hamas’s participation in the Palestinian decision making process.

The chumminess between Egyptian and Israeli leaders is likely to cool down. Expect fewer Israeli official visits to Sharm El Sheikh and Cairo, less public jokes with Netanyahu or hugs with Livni. The cold peace may get a notch colder, but no more. After all, the army has declared it will honor Egypt’s international agreements – a clear reference to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. With the politically influential armed forces as guarantor of the treaty, any public policy changes vis-à-vis Israel will likely be more cosmetic than real.

Israel can contribute to shaping the aftermath of the revolution and determine how this crisis affects it.  It can either keep holding on to its wish that Egypt will remain a client state to the United States, and continue to uphold its peace agreement by sheer force of political pressure and international aid. Or it can attempt to reach out and, particularly by force of goodwill measures vis-à-vis Palestine and Syria, prove that it seeks to establish genuine peace and wishes to be a peaceful neighbour in the Middle East. If it does, it will discover, as the rest of the world has done over the past weeks, that Egyptian public opinion comes with a high degree of awareness.

Mohamed El Dahshan is an Egyptian economist and journalist whose articles have been published in the New Yorker, the Guardian, the New York Times and Al Masry Al Youm, amongst other publications. He lives in Cairo.

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. Mohamed El Dahshan

      Nachum – you’ve been lied to, I’m afraid. I watched the video you linked to, and it is of the chants that I have indeed mentioned in my article. And nowhere does anyone say “Death to Israel”.
      It is interesting however that this is seemingly your main takeaway from the Egyptian revolution; I do hope you’ll review your position.

      Reply to Comment
    2. Zeina

      If Israel really cares about peace, then it should start treating its enemies well and fair before its too late. But what Israel is doing is creating more hatred towards it. Its ridiculous for me as an Arab and Palestinian to think about peace with Israel when I see what they’re doing everyday. So as to maintain that peace “treaty” (quotation marks; because it only addresses the Israeli interests) then Israel should start working on real peace based on justice and equality, seems far fetched coming from this country, but one can only say.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Etay

      This comment was edited for length and relevance.

      There are extremists in both sides of the argument, however Israel and Israelis for the most part held theirs at bay. Imagine if an equivalent to the Muslim brother leader will rise up in Israel and gain enough power, what would happen next…

      Reply to Comment
    4. Ben Israel

      This comment was edited for length, relevance and courtesy. Please avoid a needlessly argumentative tone, and keep your comment to a maximum of 150 words.

      Ayman Nour says “the Camp David Accords are, in effect, over.” How does context change the meaning of that sentence?

      Mr. El Dahshan’s claim that the chants about marching to Jerusalem are just a tradition does not convince me.

      It sounds as though the writer is saying, in effect,”You know Arabs, they just blow off steam, they don’t really mean what they say!”

      Given Israeli-Egyptian history, I wonder why I should not take these threats literally. Only recently, the Egyptian media reported that Zionist sharks were set loose by the nefarious Israelis in order to drive tourists away from Egypt.

      Finally, there is the popular spiritual leader Qaradawi, who is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Mr. Qaradawi has made explicitly anti-Semitic statements. Shouldn’t Israelis be worried about him and his possible influence in a future government?

      Reply to Comment
    5. ChicagosMonster

      @Ben Israel: No. Not only is Israel easily capable of handling itself against Egypt militarily, but Egypt doesn’t need to use violence to undermine Israel. Any Egyptian leader can simply open the Rafah border crossing to Gaza and allow supplies in (and refugees out), as well as refuse to impose the Egyptian naval blockade of Gaza, something the right wing in Israel is terrified of.

      For all the Israeli paranoia of Hamas – an Israeli creation, the right wing in Israel seems to be equally scared of an Islamic government coming into power in Egypt and now, once Ghaddafi is gone, in Libya. Maybe, rather than projecting their insecurities on everyone else in the region, this could be an opportunity for Israel to think to itself: “Hmm, maybe the ENTIRE WORLD is correct when they denounce our ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, our countless war crimes, and the dozens of UN resolutions we arrogantly just ignore.”

      Rather than pointing the finger at everybody else, I think it’s high time that Israel examines its own faults (and addresses the grievances that the entire world, not only Arab world) have brought up numerous times.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Omer

      first time in the site. very interesting.
      I think that Mohamed doesn’t understand is that Israelis are afraid from Egypt. The Egyptian army is modern, western and very big. In addition, the Israeli public is afraid of wars. I know that it doesn’t seems like this in the west bank, but it is true.
      The stop of the gas flow to Israel also proven to the Israelis that the relationships can be damaged soon.
      To summarize- I as Israeli respect the Egyptian revolution. But I am also afraid that the a Muslim country will arise (even if the chances are low)
      Omer

      Reply to Comment
    7. yehoshua

      was there a revolution in Egypt? at the moment we see reshuffles within the ruling establishment

      Reply to Comment
    8. fiona

      Whenever I see alarming and militant statements dismissed as so much “red meat” for the masses, or being “taken out of context”, I really start to worry. The Egyptian Revolution is too young, there is a certain leadership vacuum. When people see that there really are no significant changes in their lives, it will be easy to ignite the crowds by channeling their frustrations into anti-Israeli and anti-Western sentiment and actions. The West is far, but Israel is right next door, alas.

      Reply to Comment

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel