Egypt’s Political Struggle



When Western Left and Right Stop Lecturing Us?


Adel Samara

Time and experience had taught us that we must fight, in parallel, two forms of war of liberation:


·        Liberation war from settler colonialism, colonialism, unequal exchange and dependency…etc.

·        And a war of liberation from West’s discourse, including that of the left.


While we listen to many of their analysis, they, western left and right, still act as if they know our situation on the ground more than us.


They are in fact supported by more sources of information even about Arab Homeland than us, due to several reasons. But, they can’t feel or understand what is going on the ground and at level of masses. This reminds me of the importance of Mao’s great slogan: “The mass line”.


In October 1984, few days after my arrival to London to study at University of London, I met a British leftist who directly started explaining to me how revolution must take place in Egypt. I disagreed with both his way of “lecturing” and his analysis, and we never met again.


Lately, I read an article by the good leftist writer James Petras on Arab situation especially in Syria and Egypt and the role played by Saudi Arabia against people of both countries.

(Saudi Arabia: A Retrograde Rentier Dictatorship and Global Terrorism by James Petras).
Petras wrote:


“In Egypt, Bandar developed, in coordination with Israel (but for different reasons), a strategy of undermining the relatively independent, democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood regime of Mohammed Morsi”


It is a simplification of politics to believe that Bandar designing Saudi policy independently. Yes, there is a Saudi relative independence from US politics in the region. But the main Bandar’s motive to coordinate with the Zionist Ashkenazi Regime (ZAR) is their joint interest against Iran and the resistance camp in the region. It is a coordination designed by the US administration.


As for Morsi’s presidency, it is good to go back and remember how Moslem Brothers (MB) jumped on the 25 January 2011 mobilization after its clear triumph.


One shouldn’t go to all details of MB propaganda to gain parliament and presidency elections, but it is good to remind Petras who knew Latin America of the first defeat by Feri against Allende because the “… decisive importance of the Catholic Church (Feri’s 400.000-vote plurality over Allende was given him by women, as the separate count of ballot papers by sex revealed)…’charity organization’ Critas enjoyed to buy votes among callampas (the working-class areas of Santiago) by the free distribution of foodstaffs from the Alliance for Progress”. (Regis Debray, Strategy for Revolution, Pelican, 1970: 166).


This reminds me of a political joke. When Nasser of Egypt sent 1963 troops to support Yemeni revolution against Imam’s regime who was highly supported by Saudi Arabia, Imam’s tribal camp against the Republicans were continuously demanding more flour saying “ya dijij ya bkjamhir – Either flour or we will ally with the Republicans).


MB bought voices by using Islam on the one hand and by distribution oil and sugar for the large numbers of poor masses. The money was provided by Qatar!


Petras argues:


“…Bandar and the Saudi dictatorship financially backed the military coup and dictatorship of General Sisi. The US strategy of a power-sharing agreement between the Muslim Brotherhood and the military regime, combining popular electoral legitimacy and the pro-Israel-pro NATO military was sabotaged. With a $15 billion aid package and promises of more to come, Bandar provided the Egyptian military a financial lifeline and economic immunity from any international financial reprisals. None were taken of any consequences. The military crushed the Brotherhood, jailed and threatened to execute its elected leaders. It outlawed sectors of the liberal-left opposition which it had used as cannon fodder to justify its seizure of power. “


Many western and Latin American leftist and right wing regimes, parties and writers who ignore the fact that the Egyptian masses flooded to the streets against Morsi’s regime. He is the same Morsi who announced the Constitutional Declaration which made him unquestionable and unaccountable! Analysis of those westerners and Latin Americans stem from their discourse that they knew in every place of the globe more that its own people! They fail to understand that the Egyptian army supported the people’s movement and protest, but did not initiate that protest.


In fact, the army can’t stand neutral. Both, the regime and the masses will ask for its’ support. It must stand in one of two camps:


·         Either to support the minority Morsi and MB

·        Or the mass majority.


Petras added:


“In backing the military coup, Bandar eliminated a rival, democratically elected Islamic regime which stood in contrast to the Saudi despotism. “


I doubt that Petras have do not know about Morsi’s dependency on the tiny US colony in Qatar!


Petras continues on Bandar:


“He secured a like-minded dictatorial regime in a key Arab country, even though the military rulers are more secular, pro-Western, pro- Israel and less anti-Assad than the Brotherhood regime. Bandar’s success in greasing the wheels for the Egyptian coup secured a political ally but faces an uncertain future.”


The new regime in Egypt is a mixture, multitude of several forces. On the social-economic and even class levels it is not much different from that of Morsi. But it is better than that of the falsely elected MB regime in several important issues:


·        The new regime put an end to the Imperialist/MB (or regime and forces of politicized religion) alliance to rule Arab Homeland for several decades to come.


·        As a secular regime, it protects the conditions of women in Arab Homeland from further deterioration.


·        It neutralizes Egypt from participating Counter-Revolution war against Syria. In his last few days Morsi declared war against Syria.



·        When four Egyptian Shea’ were persecuted and killed by 3000 mobs in Egypt, Morsi did not mention that is his public speeches.


·        While the new regime is not too much different on a class level from that of MB, it included a variety of class and political organizations.


It is understandable that Trotskyite organizations support MB from the position of that the new regime is closer to Arab nationalism as the main real enemy against ZAR, but it is strange that many Maoist organizations fall into that trap!


After 50 years of deliberate internal destruction of Egypt, it is not easy for any regime to achieve a fast change and development in most levels. Both MB and the “Multitude” from a class point view is not the proper and even desperately needed regime. One might think that the fast Saudi Arabia’s financial support to the ”Multitude” (accepted or even suggested by the US) aimed at blocking any expected orientation of the regime to adopt a model of Development by Popular Protection!


Following the high percentage of Egyptians who voted in support to the new constitution, I hope that Petras and others will re-think and begin to listen at least once.