The battle over religion heats up in Egypt

Posted By Mohamed El Dahshan Thursday, February 9, 2012 - 1:35 PM Share

"You're not more Muslim than the rest of us!"

So shouted Parliament speaker Saad El-Katatany at Member of Parliament Mamdouh Ismail. The whole thing happened in Tuesday's session of Parliament in Cairo. Out of nowhere, Ismail suddenly decided to stand up in the back of the assembly and make the call for prayer, the azan. Loud. Ignoring the speaker's objection to his disorderly conduct.

It was surreal.

Ismail is one of Egypt's ultraconservative Salafis. Speaker El-Katatny is an MP from the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, so he's hardly a secularist.

But even to him Ismail's actions were utterly unnecessary. An irritated Katatny chastised his unruly colleague: "There is a mosque [in the parliament complex] for the call for prayer; this room is for discussion."

But MP Ismail was trying to one-up everyone else. His previous claim to fame, as journalist Issandr Amrani reminds us, was the lawsuit he filed against businessman and politician Naguib Sawiris for tweeting what he deemed to be an offensive cartoon. So it seems that he needed a new hobbyhorse.

The importance of this incident is twofold.

First, it showcases the difference between the Muslim Brothers and the Salafists. Both are Islamists, adherents of political Islam, and are instrumentalizing religion for political gain. But Salafists, representatives of a more hardline interpretation of Islam, are often more concerned with the superficial expressions of religiousness than with faith: Think strict dress codes, beards, complete gender segregation, and so forth. The Muslim Brotherhood is both more realist and somewhat more amenable to discussion.

Second, it is a reminder that religion sells -- and particularly the superficial expressions of it.

Mamdouh Ismail probably has nothing to add to the debate. His only contribution would've been a call for prayer and perhaps even a compulsory prayer break, à la Saoudienne.

And it wouldn't have been a once-off occurrence. Ismail would've probably stood up and interrupted discussions every day for the next five years around prayer time.

Experience shows that any remotely religious decisions, even if they're motivated by pure political opportunism, are impossible to roll back. Egypt, for example, included a reference to Islamic law as the main source of legislation in Article 2 of the Constitution. That amendment wasn't part of the original version of the constitution passed in 1971; it was added in 1980. By then, President Anwar Sadat -- no great fan of religion -- was trying to lift term limits so that he could remain in power as long as he wanted, so he needed to neutralize potential pressure from the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups. Ironic, isn't it?

Another example is the addition of the words "Allah Akbar" -- God is Great -- to the Iraqi flag. This was the doing of one Saddam Hussein, another notorious secularist, just days before the Second Gulf War in January 1991. Here, too, his goal was to curry favor with the Muslim world and drum up regional support.

In 2004, when the US occupation administration in Iraq suggested modifying the flag, some of the voices that came out in defense of the existing design did so not out of nostalgia for Hussein's rule but as a reaction to a perceived American attack on a religious symbol. When the flag was finally changed in 2008, Iraqi lawmakers kept the text but dropped the stars that had adorned the banner since 1963.

And during the run-up to the Egyptian referendum on constitutional amendments in March 2011, Article 2 became the rallying cry for the campaigns by the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists -- even though said article had already been excluded from revision. The proposed amendments pertained to presidential powers and the president's term of office, so they had nothing to do with religion. Yet people who rejected the proposed amendments were often branded as "anti-religious."

The emotional weight of religion, especially superficial expressions of it, is undefeatable.

The whole incident raises one more intriguing question: Does it take an Islamist to catch an Islamist? In other words, had the speaker of Parliament been, say, a liberal MP -- would he have been successful at silencing the rowdy MP who breached decorum? Or would said hypothetical liberal MP have found himself silenced by others on the grounds that he was attacking an "Islamic" symbol, namely the call for prayer?

These are worrisome questions, because the answers may suggest that the political conversation is increasingly being drawn to the right, with any religion-flavored subject riling people up to the point of stifling the debate.

Mohamed El Dahshan also blogs at http://eldahshan.com and tweets at @eldahshan.

EXPLORE:DEMOCRACY LAB POSTER 5, EL-DAHSHAN, ARAB WORLD, MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, DEMOCRACY, DEMOCRACY LAB, EGYPT, ISLAM, LAW, RELIGION
 

TRAVELGIRLEGYPT

4:26 PM ET

February 9, 2012

You raise an interesting point.

Hi,

You raise a really interesting point here about not being able to roll back symbols of religion - look at the American Pledge of Allegiance for another example.

I agree that had a liberal MP been the one to object to the call of prayer interrupting the session, that he (or she) would have been shouted down. As much as I am not a fan of mixing religion and politics, the MB might be the only ones able to navigate a (relatively) reasonable course in Egypt at this time. If liberal MP's were the majority group, it would be too easy for opposition to rally the religion banner against any of their programs. If the salafists were the majority, it would be too easy for the rest of the world to go against them.

I know you found it worrisome indicating a leaning to the right but I found it a hopeful sign and a leaning toward the left. I was actually quite surprised the MB tried to stop him. Yes, it pretty much does 'take and islamist to catch an islamist' in the current climate. I am glad it happened in this case.

 

ELDAHSHAN

1:11 PM ET

February 10, 2012

Religious populism

I'm glad Katatny stopped him as well. But I'm nevetheless worried about whether the FJP will maintain this order - in the parliament and outside - or will they fall into religious populism. Because once they roll this one out, there's no pulling it back...

 

COUNTCHOCULA1011

10:05 PM ET

February 9, 2012

Congrats!

You figured out what every Muslim has long known about Salafis: that they focus obsessively over trivialities such as whether your beard is long enough or whether your feet are touching enough during prayer, and not on far more important sunnahs such as kindness and humility. The funniest thing to do with them is to tell them to smile--it's sunnah! (because they're always so grumpy faced-lol)

 

AYESHA USMAN

1:23 PM ET

March 2, 2012

nice

Farmers take sides at Corvallis meeting on future of Roundup Ready crop

Representatives of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service came to Corvallis on Thursday to learn how people felt about the possibility of deregulating Roundup Ready sugarbeets.

They got an earful.

APHIS deregulated the genetically engineered sugarbeets, created by agribusiness giant Monsanto to resist the company’s widely distributed Roundup herbicide, in 2005. But the Center for Food Safety and other genetic engineering opponents challenged that decision in court. A judge ordered APHIS to revisit the issue and, this time, prepare an environmental impact statement.

While sugarbeets are grown primarily in the upper Midwest and inland Northwest, all of the seed for those crops is produced here in the Willamette Valley, home to a thriving specialty seed industry.

But organic and conventional seed producers, as well as some vegetable growers, are worried that their crops will be contaminated by genetically modified sugarbeets, which can cross-pollinate with non-engineered beets and related species such as Swiss chard. Some food safety advocates worry about the spread of Roundup-resistant “superweeds,” while others object to genetically engineered crops of any kind.

All of those interests were represented Thursday at Oregon State University’s LaSells Stewart Center, where 34 of the 100 or so people in attendance stepped to the microphone to offer their opinions.

Large-scale beet growers from as far away as Minnesota and Michigan sang the praises of Roundup Ready sugarbeets, citing higher yields, fewer weed problems and reduced chemical applications.

Paul Stiever, a third-generation Montana farmer, called Roundup an environmentally safe herbicide that, used with Monsanto’s genetically modified beet strain, replaces as many as four different chemicals.

“If we were to lose this technology, it would increase our operating costs and make us less competitive in a global market where many countries are heavily subsidized,” he said.

Willamette Valley sugarbeet seed producers said the crop was stable and profitable. Training programs and protocols for cleaning equipment, eliminating volunteer plants after harvest and monitoring seed production, they argued, are working. And isolation distances for various crops have been established to prevent unwanted cross-pollination.

“Meeting those requirements is not easy, but the rewards for doing so will often make it worth the effort,” testified Bruce Ruddenklau, an Amity-area farmer. “Under the watchful eye of the reputable beet seed companies in the Willamette Valley, I believe we have demonstrated we can produce this crop in a responsible manner.”

But other farmers fired back, arguing that gene drift is inevitable and that sooner or later genetically modified organisms would turn up in fields where they aren’t wanted.

“My concern is that if we allow GMO sugarbeets it will lead to a slippery slope that will allow other GMO crops in the Willamette Valley,” said organic grower Clint Lindsay of A2R Farms near Tangent.

“I don’t want to mortgage the future of our farm, our ability to grow our crops, so that Monsanto can line their pockets.”

Several growers testified they have already found Roundup Ready beets growing in fields that were supposed to have been cleared of all volunteers, and one even brought in a sample and waved it around for all to see.

“This is a pest to me,” said Andrew Still, an organic seed producer from Sweet Home.

Ted Hake, the production manager for conventional producer Universal Seed, said his company was taking no official position on deregulation. But he also testified that 25 percent of his Swiss chard and table beet fields were already contaminated.

“This is a very serious matter for our customers, our growers and Universal Seed,” he said.

Philomath organic seed grower Frank Morton, who was a plaintiff in the Center for Food Safety lawsuit, said he’s losing customers because of the perceived threat of contamination.

And he had a personal message for the APHIS representatives.

“I’m glad you guys are finally here,” he said, “but you should have been here before the crop was deregulated the first time.”

Thankyou

cleaning services london

 

Transitions is the group blog of the Democracy Lab channel, a collaboration between Foreign Policy and the Legatum Institute.

Read More