When my friend posted on his Facebook’s wall, “Seerah of Uthman and Ali being replayed,”
I responded saying that I did not know what he was referring to. A few moments later, my wife told me that
President Morsi of Egypt had just been ousted.
By then, I knew what my friend was talking about. He was talking about the event leading to
Morsi’s ouster.
Then my friend asked me to write about it in my blog.
To liken the tale of Egyptian Arab Spring with the Seerah of Uthman and Ali is a little
difficult to make. The differences
between these two appear to be more than the similarities.
As for Caliph Uthman, he was ousted through assassination. President Morsi too was ousted, but his
eventual fate is still being written.
Beyond this, there is not much similarity.
Uthman was elected from the six candidates chosen
by Caliph Umar when the latter was stabbed.
Morsi was elected in the first legitimate general election after 60
years, subsequent to the fall of Hosni Mubarak.
Uthman was a member of Consultative Council during Umar; Morsi was an
outsider who used to be imprisoned during Mubarak. Uthman ruled for 12 year; Morsi managed only
one year.
As for Caliph Ali, he took over the caliphate after
the assassination of Uthman. Morsi took
over the presidency after the fall of Mubarak.
Ali ruled for about four and a half years and found relatively no
peace. So was Morsi, except that his
presidency lasted only a year. But
beyond this, there is little similarity.
Ali was not among the rebels who protested against
the reign of Uthman. In fact, he was
among Uthman’s supporters. Although Ali
had some disagreements with Uthman, the two maintained cordial relationship and
Ali had direct accessed to the troubling caliph. When the rebels surrounded the house of
Uthman, he sent two of his sons to protect the caliph. He offered his council to the caliph and
tried his best to quench the rebellion.
Morsi and the organization he represented, however,
were among the protesters against Mubarak, although they played a background
role. Morsi was the beneficiary of the Egyptian
Arab Spring because he supported it; the same cannot be said about Ali because
he was against it.
In spite of the differences, one may wonder,
therefore, as to why my friend said that the Seerah of Uthman and Ali is being replayed? The answer lies in his person. He is a devoted Muslim who yearns for Islam
to be established in Egypt. Like many
devoted Muslims, it breaks his heart to see Morsi fell in that way. It breaks my heart too.
Uthman, Ali and Morsi are three good Muslim leaders
who fall prey to the circumstances. Their
similarity lies here, except that the first two must be given priority since
they are the leading companions directly trained by the Prophet himself.
Of the three, only Ali is the true victim of the
circumstances, because to some extent, the fall of Uthman and Morsi was partly
attributed to their own doing.
Uthman was a great man but was not a great
leader. He was too gentle and too congenial,
both to his kinsmen and to his enemies. He forgave when punishment may have been a
better action. He refused to shed blood
among Muslims. If any blood were to be
spilt, he wanted it to be his blood. This
is the characteristic of a great man, but a leader sometimes needs to spill
some blood to avoid greater danger.
Uthman did nothing wrong as a man and as a Muslim, but his leadership in
this aspect is somewhat wanting (may Allah forgive me for saying such a thing
to a man loved by Allah and the Prophet).
As for Morsi, he miscalculated a little. The Arab Spring that toppled the iron ruled
of Hosni Mubarak was led mostly by the liberals and the secularists. It was not led by any particular organization
or political party. It was led
predominantly by the urban youths who wanted Egypt to be freed from the
authoritarian rule.
Morsi belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Although MB took part in the Arab Spring only
in the background, it has an added advantage when the election time came. MB is well organized with supporters all over
the country, the majority of whom did not participate in the Arab Spring. As general election is not participated only
by the participants in the Arab Spring, but by every voter throughout the country,
many of whom are MB supporters, it was not surprising therefore that the party
backed by MB won the election.
But MB in general and Morsi in particular had
misread the Arab Spring. By winning the
election, they must have thought that they were given the mandate to rule the
country as they saw fit. They moved
quickly to establish Islamic Law because this is what they had been fighting
for since MB was established in 1928.
They saw the opportunity and they seized it quickly, forgetting that the
uprising known as the Arab Spring was actually initiated by different types of
peoples and for different purpose. In
the process, they alienated the very people who gave them the opportunity.
As Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel-Prize winning
diplomat put it in a recent article in Foreign Policy magazine: “The uprising
was not about changing people, but changing our mind-set. What we see right
now, however, is just a change of faces, with the same mode of thinking as in
Mubarak’s era — only now with a religious icing on the cake.” (1)
MB also forgot that it is viewed as a threat
worldwide. While founded in Egypt, it
has networks worldwide. For that reason,
it also has enemies worldwide. Israel is
especially threatened by its rise. The
Western countries definitely do not feel comfortable with MB regardless of what
their leader say in the public. The Arab
monarchies are also not amused with the development. Alienated internally and feeling threatened
externally, in retrospection, it is not surprising that the revolt which gave
it the opportunity also revolted to oust it.
The hardliners among the Islamists are already
saying that Islam and democracy are not compatible, and that Islam cannot be
established through democracy. They cite the case of Algeria in 1991, and the
Palestinian territories in 2006. Perhaps
they are right. It could well be that
whatever Morsi did, he would be ousted nevertheless.
But history also shows that the force of military power
may not be the answer as well, as we have seen in the case of Taliban
Afghanistan.
In any case, we have to admit that while Islam
remains the same, the world in the seventh century is not the same as the
twenty first century. The quick rise and
the quick fall of MB and Morsi in Egypt should serve as the lesson to all
Islamic movements worldwide, especially to the new governments in Tunisia and
Libya, which also benefited from their Arab Springs.
In spite of what is currently happening, and
regardless of what people say, I believe that all is not lost. MB should view what has happened in the cool
headed manner. It has to remember that
when Islam first came to the scene, it eventually won and dominated the world
because it had won the hearts and minds of the people. Even though it has missed the opportunity,
the organization is stronger now than during the Mubarak and his predecessors’ times. Perhaps MB will be given a second chance,
albeit in a lesser mode.
Note:
No comments:
Post a Comment