One day, the Egyptian army (funded by the U.S.) decides to dismiss and arrest the President Mohamed Morsi (whose sons are American citizens). Another president is appointed and a Nobel Peace prize prowls around with a position I don´t really remember. Spain, like other European Union countries, decided to call the event "interruption of the democratic process", as if you were to call diarrhea, interruption of the digestive process
Most of the media decided to call things by their name and to call a coup to what had been a coup, but not before organizing debates where they could discuss whether the coup was a coup. In the end, as the tertullian’s and politicians like to say, reality is stubborn and the coups are coups. Did I repeat coup a lot?
It all would be fine, except that the rebels are "our people" and the ones ousted from power after winning elections cleanly are the "others". The west has our people both for the right and the left, making the others more others. We are not sorry because the others are the Islamists. It´s true that the complex phenomenon of Islamism does not fit into the caricature of the fanatic with horns and a tail that sometimes they draw out for us. But to be honest, with the Islamists, by their nature, at least secularism (essential for any real democracy) and women's rights are in danger.
But let us examine who our friends in Cairo are. It´s true that it all started with massive citizen protests against Morsi´s government, but no democratic country would have justified a coup - perhaps early elections - in the same way we don´t want Rajoy to be overthrown, but appointed an occasional cyclist commentator on Teledeporte.
Hearing the outcry, the soldiers got down to work. When the military takeover they are accustomed to being just disinterested people and once strengthened, they really don´t like being squeamish negotiators (an advantage for the politicians, it doesn´t matter how sly they are). So the Egyptian military, which had in fact the power before the Arab Spring, with the excuse of popular protests, once again takes over.
At the end we have the Islamists seriously pissed off and determined to regain power, summoning a celebration called "Friday of rage", as if it were a sequel to Freddy Krueger, and the army, with their royals settled in power, that do not hesitate to use a criminal and brutal repression of citizens participating in the protests.
And these are our friends. Who shoot and kill people. We can say as Kissinger Somoza, the Nicaraguan dictator, "Yes, he is a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch".
That’s what the Arab Spring ended up in? Between the criminal military and the non-encouraging prospect that the Islamists will regain power? Democracy is really difficult. You can´t improvise it in a few months or perhaps even in decades, because the respect for differences and tolerance is as sophisticated as the String Theory. Since I'm on vacation, I´m optimistic. In the Mediterranean, before the real spring, there are frosts that wilt the almond flowers. The trouble is that many people won´t see it. Neither that or anything.
Most of the media decided to call things by their name and to call a coup to what had been a coup, but not before organizing debates where they could discuss whether the coup was a coup. In the end, as the tertullian’s and politicians like to say, reality is stubborn and the coups are coups. Did I repeat coup a lot?
It all would be fine, except that the rebels are "our people" and the ones ousted from power after winning elections cleanly are the "others". The west has our people both for the right and the left, making the others more others. We are not sorry because the others are the Islamists. It´s true that the complex phenomenon of Islamism does not fit into the caricature of the fanatic with horns and a tail that sometimes they draw out for us. But to be honest, with the Islamists, by their nature, at least secularism (essential for any real democracy) and women's rights are in danger.
But let us examine who our friends in Cairo are. It´s true that it all started with massive citizen protests against Morsi´s government, but no democratic country would have justified a coup - perhaps early elections - in the same way we don´t want Rajoy to be overthrown, but appointed an occasional cyclist commentator on Teledeporte.
Hearing the outcry, the soldiers got down to work. When the military takeover they are accustomed to being just disinterested people and once strengthened, they really don´t like being squeamish negotiators (an advantage for the politicians, it doesn´t matter how sly they are). So the Egyptian military, which had in fact the power before the Arab Spring, with the excuse of popular protests, once again takes over.
At the end we have the Islamists seriously pissed off and determined to regain power, summoning a celebration called "Friday of rage", as if it were a sequel to Freddy Krueger, and the army, with their royals settled in power, that do not hesitate to use a criminal and brutal repression of citizens participating in the protests.
And these are our friends. Who shoot and kill people. We can say as Kissinger Somoza, the Nicaraguan dictator, "Yes, he is a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch".
That’s what the Arab Spring ended up in? Between the criminal military and the non-encouraging prospect that the Islamists will regain power? Democracy is really difficult. You can´t improvise it in a few months or perhaps even in decades, because the respect for differences and tolerance is as sophisticated as the String Theory. Since I'm on vacation, I´m optimistic. In the Mediterranean, before the real spring, there are frosts that wilt the almond flowers. The trouble is that many people won´t see it. Neither that or anything.
El humor está aquí, en alguna parte
Translation by Amanda Perri
Secularism and women's rights? Those are the very things that the Islamists have pledged to eliminate. Perhaps military rule is the only way of preventing Islamist rule
ResponderEliminar