Gang rape, the dark side of Egypt's protests

Last week, a 22-year-old Dutch journalist was gang-raped in Tahrir Square and had to undergo surgery for severe injuries. The assault reminds us yet again of an often overlooked aspect of the Egyptian revolution.

When Egyptians overthrew their dictator in 2011, one of the first celebratory acts in Tahrir Square included the gang beating and sexual assault of American journalist Lara Logan, who, like the Dutch journalist, landed in the hospital.

The Logan rape has always been portrayed as another unfortunate byproduct of mob violence. In fact, it was much more than that. It was a warning shot fired by men whose political beliefs are founded on a common pillar: Women must stay out of the public square.

One of the hallmarks of revolutionary victory in Tahrir Square has always been rape and sexual harassment. Mobs of men routinely set upon women, isolating, stripping and groping. No one is ever arrested or held accountable, and elected officials shrug their shoulders and blame the victims.

Vigilante groups have been organized to track the incidents. Operation Anti-Sexual Harassment, one of the groups, recorded 46 cases of sexual assaults and harassment against women on Sunday night alone -- and has added 17 more to its list that the group said happened Monday.

Egyptian women are the primary victims of sexual violence, and ultimately they are the intended recipients of the message: Stay home, your input in government and politics is not wanted.

Opinion: Why Egyptian protestors welcome the support of the army

Raping foreign journalists -- guaranteed to attract global attention -- is merely a more efficient way of getting that message across.

When Egyptians overthrew the dictator, the Muslim Brotherhood took advantage of public hatred of the dictator to ally him with Western progressive ideals, including gender equality. Out went the nongovernmental organizations that worked to make divorce easier and inheritance laws fairer. In came the thugs who stripped and beat women in the streets.

Granted, some of these crimes against women were committed by the military and the police themselves, as women like Mona Eltahawy (a journalist whose arms were broken by soldiers) and Samira Ibrahim (a young protester who sued the government, accusing an army doctor of submitting her to a forced "virginity test") have reported.

Dina Zakaria, an Egyptian journalist, reported that the men who raped the Dutch journalist last week called themselves "revolutionists." That label should surprise no one.

If one fervently believes women should stay inside their homes and out of the business of public life, what better way to accomplish that than rampant sexual harassment and sexual assault in a country in which women's virginity and honor is the sine qua non of female participation in society?

Egyptian Salafist preacher Ahmad Mahmoud Abdullah said that women protesting in Tahrir Square 'have no shame and want to be raped.'
Nina Burleigh

Not long ago, Egyptian Salafist preacher Ahmad Mahmoud Abdullah said that women protesting in Tahrir Square "have no shame and want to be raped." The public face of the Muslim Brotherhood would never espouse such a statement. But its founding intellectual lights never hid the fact that a pillar of their planned theocracy was keeping women powerless. And their record in office is one of sexist exclusion. Women held only eight seats out of 498 (four of the eight women were from the Brotherhood party) in the disbanded Parliament.

Women made up 7% of the constitutional assembly that drafted the Egyptian constitution. No wonder then that the document (approved by referendum in December 2012) refers to women only as sisters and mothers, and only within the framework of family -- not employment or public life, even though a majority of Egyptian women work.

Egypt has always been a place where life for women is nasty and brutish, if not short. Last year, a UNICEF survey showed 91% of Egyptian women between the ages of 15-49 said they had to undergo female genital mutilation. The United Nations Entity for Gender Equality in May reported that 99.3% of Egyptian women interviewed said they had been subjected to some form of sexual violence. Rape victims almost never go to the hospital and certainly not the police. There are no medical protocols for rape, and police treat female victims as prostitutes.

Whether or not that violence is political is worthy of discussion. I believe it is. At the moment, no one even debates it. It is the elephant in the room.

As the Egyptian revolution enters another chapter, and more women get stripped and sexually assaulted in the streets while being systematically excluded from the halls of power in Cairo, it is high time for American progressives and other Arab Spring commentators to stop separating anti-female violence from the politics of the Muslim Brotherhood's revolutionaries.

In the broadest sense, the West's response to the treatment of women in post-Arab Spring countries, from Egypt to Syria, says a lot about the status of women here.

We might not be able to do anything to stop violent, organized misogyny in far-off lands, but we can certainly stand up for our own principles and call it what it is.

What is the Muslim Brotherhood?

A year after Mohamed Morsy became Egypt's first democratically-elected president, millions of Egyptians took to the streets calling for him to step down.

Among the protesters' complaints was the alleged "Brotherhoodization" of the government -- the imposition of the Islamist views propagated by the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Morsy is a member.

So what is the Muslim Brotherhood?

The Muslim Brotherhood is a religious and political group founded on the belief that Islam is not simply a religion, but a way of life. It advocates a move away from secularism, and a return to the rules of the Quran as a basis for healthy families, communities, and states.

Muslim Brotherhood: Hold your ground

Muslim Brotherhood headquarters burned

Peres: Muslim Brotherhood must have plan

The movement officially rejects the use of violent means to secure its goals. However, offshoots of the group have been linked to attacks in the past, and critics blame the Brotherhood for sparking troubles elsewhere in the Middle East. Many consider it the forerunner of modern militant Islamism.

In a 1997 study for Harvard International Review, Muslim Brotherhood Deputy Chairman Mohammad Ma'mun El-Hudaibi said the Brotherhood was based on two "key pillars."

They are: the introduction of the Islamic Sharia (way of life or principles) as the basis controlling the affairs of state and society and working "to achieve unification among the Islamic countries and states, mainly among the Arab states, and liberating them from foreign imperialism."

When was the Brotherhood created?

The Muslim Brotherhood has been part of the political scene in Egypt for more than 80 years. It was formed there by Hassan al-Banna in 1928.

Teacher al-Banna and his followers were initially united by a desire to oust the British from control in Egypt, and to rid their country of what they saw as "corrupting" Western influences.

The original Brotherhood slogan was "Islam is the solution."

What is its history?

In its early years, the group concentrated on religion, education and social services, but as its membership grew, it moved into the political sphere, organizing protests against the Egyptian government.

In the 1940s, an armed wing of the Brotherhood was blamed for a string of violent acts, including the assassination of Egyptian Prime Minister Mahmud Fahmi al-Nuqrashi in 1948 -- shortly after he had ordered the dissolution of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Al-Banna himself was assassinated soon afterwards -- his supporters claimed he had been killed on the wishes of the government.

The movement went underground in the 1950s, and decades of oppression by successive Egyptian rulers led many of the Brotherhood's members to flee abroad, while others were jailed.

In the 1980s, the group disavowed violence and attempted to join the mainstream political process, but it was banned by the regime of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

Nonetheless, the Brotherhood grew throughout the decade, as part of a general growth of interest in Islam, and the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 saw a spike in membership.

In 2005, it won 20% of the seats in Egypt's parliamentary elections, running as independents. Mubarak cracked down on the group, jailing hundreds of members.

Why is it important in Egypt?

The Brotherhood is the oldest and largest opposition group in Egypt. It has had widespread support among Egypt's middle classes, and its members control many of the country's professional organizations.

Up until 2011, it was illegal under Egyptian law banning all parties based on religion. But in December that year, its political party -- the Freedom and Justice Party -- dominated parliamentary elections, winning about half of the seats up for grabs.

The group initially said it would not put forward a candidate for president, but Mohamed Morsy ran and in June 2012, became Egypt's first democratically-elected president.

Read more: Who is Mohamed Morsy?

So how successful has the Brotherhood been in power?

Morsy came to power on June 30, 2012, but since then his approval ratings have plummeted.

His government failed to keep order as the economy tanked and crime soared, including open sexual assaults on women in Egypt's streets. The chaos drove away many tourists and investors.

CNN's Ben Wedeman says the job of running Egypt today "has to be one of the most difficult jobs on Earth." He says once the Brotherhood took over, they found that much of the bureaucracy opposed them due to fears the group would impose their own supporters at every level of government.

"If you're president of Egypt and you can't trust your police and you're not sure about the army and you know that the bureaucracy doesn't like you, you're going to have a very difficult job at running this very complicated country," Wedeman said.

Read more: Morsy has few friends as deadline looms

Is there still support for the Muslim Brotherhood?

Columnist Frida Ghitis says one of the most striking things about the 2013 protests against Morsy has been the intensity of anger towards the Muslim Brotherhood.

She points out that in June 2013, more people had signed a Tamarod -- or rebel -- petition to withdraw support for Morsy than voted for him in the election -- a sign, she says that "discontent has spread beyond the liberals, or former regime supporters."

Read more: Egyptians are fed up with Morsy

Why has the brotherhood fallen out of favor?

Ghitis argues that the Brotherhood and Morsy's credibility suffered when they "repeatedly broke their word."

Ed Husain, a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, points out that Morsy promised, then failed to appoint a female vice president and a Coptic Christian deputy, for example.

Read more: Give Morsy a chance to fix this

Egyptians accuse Morsy and the Brotherhood of engaging in a process of "ikhwaninzation" -- or "Brotherhoodization", Ghitis says, describing it as "a quest to take control of state institutions and impose their Islamist views on the population."

"In the first wave of elections, many voters thought if they were Muslim -- as most Egyptians are -- they should vote for the Muslim Brotherhood. And they thought secular was synonymous with atheist. Now they're discovering how religion can be exploited for power," Ghitis says.

Egyptian historian Khaled Fahmy says Morsy adopted a "hard line, exclusive approach," choosing Muslim Brotherhood members or sympathizers for powerful and not so powerful positions in his government and the broader Egyptian administration.

Read more: 'We did not risk our lives simply to change the players'

So has the Brotherhood lost its power in Egypt?

CNN's Reza Sayah says Egypt's Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood have a history of perseverance. For decades they were oppressed, sidelined, sometimes torture and even killed - most recently under the Mubarak regime, he says, but they managed to stay organized.

He says losing power after so long could be a bitter pill to swallow.

How influential is the Brotherhood elsewhere?

There are branches of the Muslim Brotherhood in countries across the Middle East and North and East Africa, including Sudan, Syria and Saudi Arabia. There is also a branch in the U.S.

Its offshoots outside Egypt are markedly more conservative in their views: The Kuwaiti branch is said to oppose the right of women to vote.

Sayyid Qutb, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and 1960s, developed the doctrine of jihad, and the radical group Hamas is believed to be an offshoot of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood.

Worry mounts in Egypt as protesters dig in heels

Tensions are running high in Egypt nearly a month after the July 3 ouster of Mohamed Morsy, the country's first democratically elected president. Here are five things to know about what's going on in the pivotal North African nation:

Anxiety is thick in Egypt amid government preparations to evict pro-Morsy demonstrators

Protesters demanding Morsy's return to power are camped out in an east Cairo neighborhood, saying they won't leave until Morsy is restored to power.

Meanwhile, those whose protests led to Morsy's ouster -- secularists and liberals -- find themselves aligned, at least in part, with the military-backed government.

Protests in Cairo and elsewhere have turned violent, with dozens killed Saturday in Cairo in clashes between demonstrators and security forces. And more violence is possible amid government warnings to pro-Morsy demonstrators to end their protests.

The country isn't spiraling out of control, Interim Prime Minister Hazem El-Beblawi said Monday in an interview to be aired on CNN's "Amanpour."

"The situation is tense of course," he said. "No one can dispute that we have a very difficult situation."

But the government is merely trying to restore order after a month of chaotic demonstrations, he said.

However, a Muslim Brotherhood coalition that opposes Morsy's ouster said those behind his removal are "threatening national security by dragging the Egyptian army into a conflict with the majority of Egyptians, and by involving the army in attacks on peaceful demonstrators, causing a breach between the people and their army."

Opinion: Morsy a victim of Egypt's revolution of the mind

"Who is in charge?" is not necessarily a simple question to answer

Since taking power from Morsy on July 3, Egypt's military has installed an interim civilian government with Adly Mansour as interim president. He issued a decree giving himself some legislative power and outlining a path toward new elections.

But Egypt's generals still wield significant power. For instance, last week it was Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the country's defense minister, not the president, who called for mass protests in support of the military, asking supporters to provide a "referendum to take firm action against violence and terrorism."

El-Beblawi said he believes the civilian government is calling the shots.

"As far as I am concerned, I feel very much in charge with my council of ministers, and I haven't seen any indication or any sign from anyone to tell me what to be done," he told CNN's Hala Gorani. "The moment I feel that the civilian government is besieged, I will put in my resignation."

Morsy remains out of sight

He hasn't been seen publicly since the military forced him from office.

The state-run EGYNews reported Sunday that an Egyptian delegation granted permission to visit him said he is being held at an undisclosed military facility along with his chief of staff and his secretary.

El-Beblawi didn't elaborate Monday on Morsy's location, but said he is being well cared for and detained in part for his own safety. Catherine Ashton, the European Union's top diplomat, was expected to meet him during her visit to Egypt Monday, El-Beblawi said.

The former president is being held in relation for a jailbreak that took place during Egypt's 2011 revolution but well before he came to power, state media reported.

Prosecutors have said the escape of Morsy and 18 other Brotherhood members, among others, was plotted by "foreign elements" including Hamas, the Islamic Palestinian Army and Hezbollah.

Morsy, who local media reports say was in prison for a single day without any formal charges against him, is accused of escaping, destroying the prison's official records and intentionally killing and abducting police officers and prisoners.

The international community is worried

Rights groups and international leaders are concerned about the violence that's already occurred, and the threat of more.

Human Rights Watch on Sunday accused the government of intentionally killing protesters. The rights group says it based its assessment on witness interviews and video footage that in some cases appeared to show security forces shooting to kill.

"The use of deadly fire on such a scale so soon after the interim president announced the need to impose order by force suggests a shocking willingness by the police and by certain politicians to ratchet up violence against pro-Morsy protesters," Nadim Houry, the group's deputy Middle East and North Africa director, said in a statement. "It is almost impossible to imagine that so many killings would take place without an intention to kill, or at least a criminal disregard for people's lives."

Ashton is visiting Egypt on Monday, hoping to help quell the violence.

"I am going to Egypt to speak to all sides and to reinforce our message that there must be a fully inclusive transition process, taking in all political groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood," Ashton said in a statement." This process must lead -- as soon as possible -- to constitutional order, free and fair elections and a civilian-led government. I will also repeat my call to end all violence. I deeply deplore the loss of life."

On Saturday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry talked with Egypt's interim vice president and foreign minister, expressing the administration's concern about the violence.

"This is a pivotal moment for Egypt," Kerry said in a statement Saturday. "Over two years ago, the revolution began. Its final verdict is not decided, but it will be forever impacted by what happens now."

Things could get uglier

The government is threatening to break up demonstrations in what could well be another bloody confrontation between demonstrators and security forces.

On Sunday, Mansour, Egypt's interim president, issued a powder-keg decree making preparations for a possible "state of emergency," the EGYnews website reported.

"State of emergency" is a loaded term in Egypt, where former President Hosni Mubarak ruled for 30 years under an emergency decree that barred unauthorized assembly, restricted freedom of speech and allowed police to jail people indefinitely.

However, Mansour's spokesman, Ahmed El Meslemani, said Monday in a televised news conference that the government has no plans to declare emergency law.

Still, the National Defense Council has issued a stern warning to protesters backing Morsy to end their protests or face "decisive decisions" for violating the law, and El-Beblawi said the government cannot stand by while protesters disrupt normal routines.

On Monday, Military helicopters dropped leaflets on pro-Morsy protesters in Rabaa al-Adawiya and appealed for them not to approach military installations and units, EGYnews said.

"We call on everyone to cooperate and respond to the instructions of the armed forces personnel in order for the security and stability of the country. No violence. Do not sabotage. No bloodshed," the leaflets read.

UN chief says over 100,000 people killed in Syria

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Thursday raised the death toll in Syria's civil war to more than 100,000, up from nearly 93,000 just over a month ago.
Ban called on the Syrian government and opposition to halt the violence in the 2 ½ year civil war, saying it is "imperative to have a peace conference in Geneva as soon as possible."
The secretary-general spoke before talks with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who stood nearby.
"There is no military solution to Syria," Kerry then told reporters. "There is only a political solution, and that will require leadership in order to bring people to the table."
The United States and Russia are trying to convene an international conference in Geneva, along with the United Nations, to try to agree on a transitional government based on a plan adopted in that city a year ago.
Kerry said he talked to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Wednesday and that both countries remained committed to bringing the warring parties together to further peace efforts.
"We will try our hardest to make that happen as soon as is possible," Kerry said.

Egypt braces for rival rallies, army signals crackdown

A deeply polarised Egypt braced for bloodshed on Friday in rival mass rallies summoned by the army that ousted the state's first freely elected president and by the Islamists who back him.
Both sides warned of a decisive struggle for the future of the Arab world's most populous country, convulsed by political and economic turmoil since the 2011 uprising that ended 30 years of autocratic rule by Hosni Mubarak.
Army chief General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has called Egyptians into the streets to give the military a "mandate" to confront weeks of violence unleashed by his July 3 overthrow of Islamist President Mohamed Mursi.
A military official said the army had given Mursi's Muslim Brotherhood a Saturday deadline to end its resistance and join a military-set roadmap to fresh elections, signalling a turning-point in the confrontation.
The Brotherhood fears a crackdown to wipe out an Islamist movement that emerged from decades in the shadows to win every election since Mubarak's fall, but was brought down by the army after barely a year in government.
The movement, which has manned a street vigil for almost a month with thousands of followers demanding Mursi's return, has called its own counter-demonstrations. Confrontation appeared inevitable following a month of clashes in which close to 200 people, mainly supporters of Mursi, have died.
The army threatened to "turn its guns" on those who use violence. The Brotherhood warned of civil war.
"We will not initiate any move, but will definitely react harshly against any calls for violence or black terrorism from Brotherhood leaders or their supporters," the army official told Reuters.
There is deepening alarm in the West over the course taken by the country of 84 million people, a pivotal nation between the Middle East and North Africa and recipient of some $1.5 billion yearly in aid from the United States, mainly for the military.
Signalling its displeasure, Washington said this week it had delayed delivery of four F-16 fighter jets to Cairo and called on the Egyptian army on Thursday to exercise "maximum restraint and caution" during Friday's rallies.
"This is a critical time for Egyptians to come together, particularly if they want to move beyond cycles of unrest and instability," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters aboard Air Force One.
"WE WILL CLEANSE EGYPT"
Brotherhood supporters have been camped out in a Cairo square since June 28, guarded by men with sticks behind barricades and sandbags. They fear a repeat of the July 8 killing of more than 50 Mursi supporters when security forces opened fire outside a Cairo barracks.
The Brotherhood says it wants nothing to do with the army's transition plan. With Mursi still in military detention at an undisclosed location, there is slim hope for compromise.
"Tomorrow we will cleanse Egypt," said Mohammed Abdul Aziz, a spokesman for the Tamarud ("Rebel") youth movement that helped rally millions in anti-Mursi street protests before the army moved against him.
"There are men carrying guns on the street," he told Reuters. "We will not let extremists ruin our revolution."
Anti-Mursi protesters began gathering overnight in Cairo's Tahrir square, epicentre of the rallies that brought down Mubarak and preceded the army's overthrow of Mursi, as well as at the capital's presidential palace, in Egypt's second city of Alexandria and in Port Said on the Suez canal.
The rallies were expected to peak after the evening prayer marking the end of the day's Ramadan fast.
Witnesses said army helicopters had dropped flyers at the Brotherhood vigil calling on people to refrain from violence. The Interior Ministry said it would undertake "unprecedented measures to protect citizens and their property".
The Brotherhood says it is the authorities themselves that have stirred up the violence to justify their crackdown.
Sisi delivered his call on Wednesday in full military uniform and dark sunglasses. He was appointed by Mursi in a bid by the president to rein in Egypt's all-powerful military, but Sisi turned against him after a year in which the Egyptian economy floundered and support for Mursi slumped.
Posters of the general have since appeared in shops and stalls across Cairo.
The country remains deeply split over what happened on July 3. The Brotherhood accuses the army of ejecting a democratically elected leader in a long-planned coup, while its opponents say the army responded to the will of the people.
Sisi announced the nationwide rallies after a bomb attack on a police station in Mansoura, a city north of Cairo, in which a policeman was killed.
Since Mursi was deposed, hardline Islamists have also escalated a violent campaign against the state in the lawless Sinai Peninsula, near Egypt's border with Israel and the Palestinina Gaza strip, with daily attacks on security forces.
The influential Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, head of Egypt's top Islamic institute Al-Azhar, urged Egyptians to heed the army's call.
"The Azhar's understanding is that the army's protest call was made for all Egyptians to unite and stand against violence," he said in a statement aired on state television. "I ask all Egyptians to rally to save Egypt."

On Afghan Child Brides, Drug Lords and Chatting With One Insanely Courageous Reporter

Reporting in Afghanistan is pretty hairy these days. Reporting outside “the Kabul bubble” is positively dangerous. But what can I say about a blonde, Afghan-American female journalist reporting – sometimes undercover – across the country, including the southern Pashtun badlands, trying to interview drug lords, mules, lackeys and hostile Pashtun patriarchs in one of the world’s most hostile regions?

Well, I can say she’s audacious. I can also tell you that she had me very worried sometimes.

Meet my dear friend Fariba Nawa, author of the newly released book, “Opium Nation: Child Brides, Drug Lords and One Woman’s Journey Through Afghanistan” (Perennial/Harper Collins).

When it comes to the multibillion dollar Afghan drug business, there are plenty of statistics and reports and experts expounding about this subject. If you’re lucky, you get the odd footage of some security official slashing poppy fields.  If you’re really lucky, you may even get the odd quote from a sullen Afghan farmer about his livelihood destroyed.

What makes Fariba’s book so gripping – and important – are the very real characters, the human stories in this business, including the people who are enriched by drugs as well as those ensnared by it.

To get the story though, Faribe went through some pretty harrowing and dangerous experiences.
I remember one particular incident, when I reached Fariba on her satellite phone back in 2005 when she was in southern Afghanistan.

Before setting off from Kabul, Fariba had sought my advice about a man who was going to be her local guide in Helmand, a drug-infested southern Afghan province that has seen some of the worst fighting in recent years.
Fariba wasn’t sure if she could trust this guy and wondering what to do.

This is a very tricky business in this business. Fixers, local guides and translators are critical in conflict zones – a matter of life and death, at times. If you’re a woman – and especially a female reporter in Afghanistan – they often function as de facto security men. A good local fixer from the right family, tribe or sub-tribe with a cell phone full of contacts is honestly the best reporting tool in the field.
Fariba, who was born in Afghanistan and speaks excellent Dari, doesn’t need anyone to tell her this.

So, when she called to tell me about her doubts about this guide - who was a relative of a friend - I was thrown off-guard.
When it comes to Afghanistan, I’m the one constantly calling Fariba for contacts, translations and advice. Afghanistan is her homeland, she’s the queen in these parts. What could I possibly tell her about reporting in Afghanistan that she didn’t already know?

I offered her the one lousy piece of advice I give all my friends setting off on a dangerous reporting mission: if you feel it’s too dangerous, trust your gut and don’t be afraid to admit you’re scared.
But who listens to me? Fariba of course decided to go for it in the end.

So, she duly left Kabul and headed to the southern Afghan city of Kandahar, from where she was to hire a car to Helmand.
But our conversation troubled me enough to make that call, back in 2005, just to check-in.

The call, unfortunately, did nothing to allay my anxieties.
When I reached her on the sat phone, Fariba was whispering into her earpiece, I could barely hear her. It wasn’t because the connection was bad. It was because she didn’t want to be heard speaking English.

Mind you she wasn’t on the road, she was in the Kandahar offices of an Afghan NGO, where she was staying before leaving for Helmand.
Cripes, I thought. If she doesn’t feel safe enough to talk in the premises of an NGO office, what’s going to happen when she leaves Kandahar for rural Helmand?



Fariba was going to Helmand in search of one of the characters in her book, a feisty little Afghan girl who was bartered to be married to a man 34 years older than her as a payment for an opium debt.

But that’s enough from me. I’m not going to give away the story. You’ll have the read the book for that…

(In the interest of full disclosure, Fariba, needless to say, is a friend. For some reason, mostly because she’s very kind, she has cited me in her acknowledgments – as one of her “friends and colleagues who gave ideas, feedback and support”. I mention this, once again, in the interest of full disclosure, although I really provided nominal feedback and support.)

Demagogue Dies Without Facing Justice, But Girl Arrested for Clicking ‘Like’ on Facebook

I was at a dinner table full of journalists over the weekend, with the conversation moving from Gaza to Syria to East Asia. Late into the night, I noted that one of the vilest figures in my lifetime had died this week – without ever facing justice.

Nobody at the table knew what I was talking about.

“Bal Thackeray - head of the Bombay-based, right-wing Shiv Sena party,” I explained.

‘Ah yes, the guy from India who died,’ was all they could muster.

“You know of course this is the guy who renamed and forever changed Bombay city, who directed a well-organized campaign of violence against the city’s Muslims, resulting in the deaths of nearly a thousand people during the 1992-1993 riots - yeah?” I asked.

‘Really?’ A table full of flabbergasted faces confronted me.

When it comes to India, the script tends to be so polished – world’s largest democracy, rising power, that sort of thing – that even fairly well-informed people across the globe have little idea about the uglier realities in modern India.

For nearly two decades, at dinner tables, bars, coffee shops and shishya stalls on different continents, I have tried to present the hidden script – with little success.

Sometimes in this business, when you have a complicated story to tell, you try to make it accessible for an international audience by putting a human face to complex issues. I now realize I could have made it a lot easier if I just relayed the yarn about the exploits of a certain Bal Thackeray.

A Chilling Legacy Lives On

In life and in death, Bal Thackeray was – and continues to be – the human face of everything that has gone horribly wrong with the dream of a pluralistic, tolerant, cosmopolitan and accountable India.

Right now, as we speak, the guy is stone, cold dead. Yet his chilling legacy lives on – just ask Shaheen Dhada, a 21-year-old Bombay resident, and her friend, Ruhi Shrinivasan.

Dhada was arrested early Monday for posting a comment on Facebook criticizing the shutdown of Bombay, India’s financial capital, over the weekend, following Thackeray's death. Shrinivasan was held for – get this - clicking the “like” button.

Here’s the post according to Indian media reports: "People like Bal Thackeray are born and die daily and one should not observe a bandh for that,” she wrote. Bandh is the Hindi word for shutdown.

Notice the 92-character post does not explicitly criticize Thackeray – it merely questions the complete shutdown of the Indian financial capital over the weekend.

According to the police, Dhada and Shrinivasan were arrested following a complaint filed by a local Shiv Sena activist accusing the girls of making “statements creating or promoting enmity” and inciting violence – charges their lawyer denies.

Following a court hearing Monday afternoon, the girls were released on bail. Dhada has since taken down the post and has apparently apologized for it – even though she doesn’t need to.

But that did not stop angry Shiv Sena activists from vandalizing a hospital run by one of her relatives, according to Indian media reports.

Nightmare in the Indian City of Dreams

This is how it works in India’s city of dreams, the birthplace of Bollywood, the uber polis of the world's largest democracy.

This is how Thackeray – or “Balasaheb” as he’s known by his fawning, worshipful, often thuggish supporters – has operated in life and in death.

Violence, or the fear of violence, is what enabled a one-time newspaper cartoonist to rise to xenophobic demagogue stature, publicly threaten various groups (especially Indian Muslims), stoke deadly riots, proclaim his admiration for Hitler, emulate his hero’s fascist techniques of wielding political violence – and get away with it.

Thackeray died at 86 of natural causes having never faced justice – not for lack of proof, but because the Indian state was afraid of the consequences of putting a man like him in jail.

Here’s what the official report on the 1992-1993 Bombay riots, which killed around 900 people, had to say about justice – or the lack thereof – following the city’s worst massacres.

“Even after it became apparent that the leaders of the Shiv Sena were active in stoking the fire of the communal riots, the police dragged their feet on the facile and exaggerated assumption that if such leaders were arrested the communal situation would further flare up, or…’Bombay would burn.’”

Notice how a strongman-politician who incited violence, dies without ever facing justice. But one girl is arrested for posting a Facebook comment criticizing the city’s shutdown following his death and her friend is detained for clicking “like” – nice.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T, Find Out What It Means to Me

It was fear, not respect, that drove India's commerical hub into an involuntary bandh mode. As shopkeepers, vendors, taxi drivers, theater owners and businessmen across the city well know, if the Shiv Sena decides to go on a mass strike, you shutdown shop – or you will be beaten up and/or your property destroyed. Simple.

The truly insidious part though is not just the Shiv Sena’s ugly politics and the even uglier political tools of fear, blackmail and protection rackets they wield in India’s wealthiest city.

It’s the extent to which the city’s – even the nation’s – elites have groveled and kowtowed to the Don Corleone of Bombay.

At Thackeray’s funeral service on Sunday, the lineup of national political figures, Bollywood stars, starlets, businessmen and industrialists was impressive.

If they had any questions about Thackeray’s culpability in an array of crimes, they did not say.

The media coverage – nationwide live coverage of the final rites of a very local political figure – was also notably lacking in balance.

To be fair, there were a number of dissenting voices of ordinary Indians – on Facebook among other platforms.

In a letter to the chief minister of Maharashtra, Justice Katju, chairman of the Press Council of India and former Supreme Court judge, protested the arrests of the two girls over a Facebook post.

“To my mind, it is absurd to say that protesting against a bandh hurts religious sentiments,” said Justice Katju, before adding that the Indian Constitution guarantees free speech and warning that “this arrest itself appears to be a criminal act”.

A number of Facebook users were quick to support the girls with several people urging their friends to cut and paste the infamous Facebook quote on their walls.

A couple of folks who had posted critical posts wondered if half the city would end up in jail.

“There’s a loud pounding at my door,” joked a well-known journalist who had spent the weekend criticizing Bombay’s Dear Leader on a variety of news channels.

Shortly after I heard the news of Thackeray’s death on Saturday evening, I posted the following comment on Facebook: “Good riddance – the end of one of the vilest figures of my lifetime. A minute’s silence for the victims of his criminal rhetoric - including Bombay, a city he renamed and irrevocably changed, and the state that afforded him a lifetime without facing justice.”

But then I’m oceans away from India’s city of dreams and I don’t have to fear a knock on my door - so I can click "like" as and when I like.

Old foes, new friends: Mali eases suspicious minds

What a difference a military intervention makes.

Old foes become new friends, once suspicious allies become indispensable partners in war.

The latest French military intervention in Mali is shaking things up in so many ways, I don’t know where to begin.

Let’s start with Washington’s growing footprint in Africa.

In a report that has generated a buzz in France, The New York Times this week revealed that the US is preparing to establish a drone base in northwest Africa – possibly Niger.

On Monday, the US and Niger signed what they call a “status-of-forces agreement” – which sparked a spate of stories about Africa becoming a priority in US anti-terror efforts following the Malian operation and the Algerian hostage crisis earlier this month.

But the one that caught my eye was the Wall Street Journal report on the US and France moving to create an intelligence hub in Niger.

Ah, the US and France joining together in the fight against the bad guys in Africa. How nice, how reassuring, how perfectly logical…

Wait, hold on a second, did we just say the US and France together in Africa?

Afri - keep off my turf - ca?!

And not just any old part of Africa at that. We’re talking about French-speaking – or Francophone - northwest Africa.

Africa what? Africa where?

Much has been said about the US and France as suspicious allies. It reached silly-season lows during the pre-Iraq War “freedom fries” saga of course, but it’s been raging since Cold War days.

In Africa, the French have had their own silly season in their former colonies, which the French call “Françafrique” – or the incestuous system of patronage between Paris and the political elites in their former African colonies.

With Françafrique running on full-throttle despite periodic French presidential vows to stop it, the French have been very protective about their African backyard.

In the post-9/11, pre-Malian intervention days, it sometimes felt like French and US officials were on different planets when it came to North and West Africa.

French officials and journalists would darkly mutter about the US base in Djibouti, the US military’s Africa Command (Africom), Washington’s intelligence outreach with the Algerians…proof, they maintained, that the mighty US was meddling in their turf and ousting poor old France.

But whenever I aired these concerns with US officials, ex-officials, experts or former CIA honchos, I invariably received the same reply: My dear girl, we’re stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan. Africa what? Africa where? That continent where those nasty guys dragged our Black Hawk boys through the streets of Mogadishu? The less time and money we spend out there, the better. The French are welcome to Africa. They’re masters at the African game in any case - and we wish them well.

I never met a single Frenchman or woman who believed this perfectly logical line.

Bah oui, they’d shrug. That’s what the US says. But what about the base in Djibouti eh? And Africom? The US is ALL over Africa - c’est evident.

Bring it on, Rambo

Then suddenly, on Jan. 11, the Malian intervention began and the French could not get enough of the dreaded USA.

At every edit meeting, I was being asked to write about US cooperation – or the lack thereof – in the Malian intervention. They’re not providing us air refueling tankers! This, after the Obama administration initially balked at the French request, sparking behind-the-scenes consternation that the US response was not as fast or robust as Paris had hoped.

In the end, the Obama administration did agree to provide those air tankers – phew!



But then Washington made some noises about a political solution to the Malian crisis and once again, alarm bells pealed and guttural exclamations issued. Fancy the Rambo Americans telling us to talk, not fight.

In fact les Américains were NOT telling the French not to fight. They were just issuing a call for talks among the different, “non-terrorist” Malian players – just like the French have done.

But these are sensitive times and the French are simply keen to get by with a little military help from friends. US spy drone base in Niger? Bring it on, Rambo. A joint intelligence hub in Francophone West Africa? Mais, pourquoi pas?

After all, to paraphrase Elvis, we can’t build our al Qaeda-free African dreams on – suspicious minds.

Enter Nigeria, the new best friend on the bloc

The USA is not the only new best friend on the bloc. There’s Nigeria too - Africa’s most populous, decidedly non-Francophone, proudly independent, Anglophone nation.

France and Nigeria have not been the best of friends, to put it mildly.

During the 1967-1970 Biafra conflict – a civil war that still haunts Nigeria – France did not hide its support for the Biafra secessionists, funnelling arms to the rebels, straining bilateral relations and wounding the national psyche of a proud African country.

French-Nigerian relations took a further tumble during the 1990s Liberian Civil War, when France, distrustful of Nigeria’s regional superpower status in its Françafrique backyard, backed opposing proxy rebels.

The two Anglophone countries in the West African region – Ghana and Nigeria – have been disparaging about what they see as their Francophone neighbors’ craven subservience to their former colonial master – from voting with Paris at the UN, to handing plum contracts to France. In other words, Françafrique viewed from the other side.

But all that, it seems, is so yesterday. Mali has changed all that.

The squash-playing Nigerian at the helm

Since the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2085 authorizing the deployment of an African-led International Support Mission to Mali (AFISMA) in December 2012, the Nigerians have been quick to offer help, overcoming domestic opposition to pledge troops for the mission.

When the Jan. 11 French invasion jumpstarted the process, the Nigerians speeded up their deployment, with contingents arriving at Bamako Airport looking sharp and serious.



And guess who’s heading AFISMA? The erudite, media-savvy, squash and tennis-playing, decorated Nigerian military official, Major General Shehu Abdulkadir.

Abdulkadir, we’re told, speaks English and his native Hausa and he can also communicate in French.

For some reason, I think even if the Nigerian major general didn’t speak a word of French, it wouldn’t matter.

Mali is changing the old dynamics. There’s nothing like a war to win new friends – and ease suspicious minds.

(*Photos courtesy: EMA / armée de l'Air)

Coup or whatchamacallit, Egypt is not Algeria, Pakistan, or any ‘stan

In the 48-hour lead-up to Mohammed Morsi’s ouster, the post-presidential expulsion talking points were already starting to emerge.

First, was the very fundamental issue of whether this military ouster of a democratically elected Islamist president is a good idea or bad one. In other words, do we slot this one in the “evil” or “admirable” box?

Next, the business of semantics: coup or revolution? Triumph of popular will or subversion of democracy? How are we supposed to spin this one?
Since military takeovers – temporary or longstanding – are not new, we can always look for parallels in other countries where khaki-clad generals have seized power from civilian leaders.

It doesn’t matter if different countries and societies have unique histories, contexts and circumstances. Everybody loves a good analogy.

We love it even more when we can use countries as metaphors. So, in a 12-month period, one West African nation moved from “Is Mali the next Afghanistan?” to “Mali is not the next Afghanistan”.

We set up a crap comparison, then knock it down. That’s how it is in this business.

In Egypt’s case, we narrowed it down to two Muslim-dominated countries.  

The Algeria analogy started shortly after Egypt’s army chief Gen. Abdel Fattah al Sisi issued the 48-hour ultimatum on Monday night to Morsi and other Egyptian politicians to work it out or face the consequences.
For anyone who’s covered Algeria, this analogy is a jaw-dropper.

Yes, the Algerian military scrapped the 1992 elections, which the Islamist FIS (Front Islamique de Salut) party was expected to win, sparking a grotesquely ferocious civil war.

But Algeria has an unmatched history and context that stretches back from FLN domination, to Boumediene’s socialist isolation, to a brutal national struggle, to French colonial torture chambers, to…I can go on, but you get the point.

That did not stop the Times of Israel from proclaiming, “Overnight, Egypt becomes Algeria”.

You would think the Israelis would know the difference, but countries can apparently transmogrify overnight. Frankly, the Israelis should be happier with a military pouvoir-dominated Egypt than a Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Arab nation, so I don’t understand what they’re complaining about.

The Pakistan comparisons, I admit, were mostly harmless and hilarious. "Yaars,” tweeted one well-meaning Pakistani, using the Urdu word for buddies, “this whole military coup isnt such a hot idea. Please reconsider. Trust us. We have tons of experience - Pakistanis to Egyptians.”

Follow that dollar

Analogies done, let’s get down to semantics.

At the heart of the coup v. revolution debate lies that $1.5 billion US aid to Egypt – as we are being frequently reminded these days.

This is because the US has the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act, which mandates that Washington must suspend foreign aid to any nation whose elected leader is ousted in a coup d'etat.

Yeah, sure. Tell that to Haiti, Honduras and Pakistan – those are just the countries I can think of, there are probably a whole lot more. You see, the Foreign Assistance Act is as flexible as a contortionist – there are all sorts of legal provisions and presidential waivers that can keep Washington’s largesse flowing – as the Haitians, Hondurans and Pakistanis know.

Meanwhile, Sen. Patrick Leahy, chairman of Senate subcommittee overseeing foreign aid, has already said his committee will be reviewing “future aid to the Egyptian government as we wait for a clearer picture”.
I tweeted that Leahy announcement last night simply because it’s newsworthy and promptly received some very irate replies for my efforts.

“KEEP YOUR AID, YOU DON'T CONTROL US!” hollered one incensed Egyptian.

I hear you, angry tweeter. I understand the sentiment behind that rebuke - even if that $1.5 billion is critical in a country with plummeting foreign reserves, rising unemployment and spiralling inflation.

Secular liberal Egyptians v. secular liberal non-Egyptians

This “coup is a coup is not a coup or is it?” semantics is roiling a number of people in and out of Egypt.

Forget about the “deep division” clichés between Islamist and liberals. There’s now a yawning gap between secular liberal Egyptians insisting the events of July 3 was not a coup and secular liberal non-Egyptians hell-bent on proving them wrong.
So, for every Sandmonkey (the social media alias for popular Egyptian blogger Mahmoud Salem) tweeting, “Dear Foreigners, can you stop giving us lessons in democracy?” there’s a Robert Fisk calling it a coup or a Patrick Galey dishing out emotionally fraught lessons in democracy.
 
There’s not a single Egyptian who's unaware of the challenges and dangers facing his/her nation in the next few days and months.

The “Morsitimer” site that ticked down to the military’s 48-hour ultimatum earlier this week has been transformed into an “Egyptian Timer”. The site now features a roadmap checklist that includes the formation of a technocratic government and early presidential elections.

They’ve had more than two years to learn their lessons and yet lectures in democracy are being dispersed ad nauseam by armies of non-Egyptian pundits.

Overlooking the signs before the Arab uprisings

I’ve decided I’m just not going down that path anymore simply because I’ve been there, done that.

When I started out in journalism in the 1990s, the Algerian civil war was raging and that conflict overshadowed my coverage of the region for the next two decades - which is why those Algeria analogies really get under my skin.

My lessons from the Algerian conflict were pretty straightforward: this is what happens when the will of the people is crushed by the military. This is the difference between assertive French style secularism and US style passive secularism - which in foreign relations translates into anything from respecting the Islamist will of the people, to funding the mujahideen.

So, for many years, I viewed secular extremist elites in the region – from Francophile Algerians to Francophile Lebanese – with as much suspicion as Islamic fundamentalists.

After the 2000 Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, for instance, I was big into the “Hezbollah has entered the political sphere” argument. That nuance lasted until years later - after Hezbollah had used their political base to consolidate their military power - a couple of Hezbollah thugs detained me for a couple of hours just to show me who’s the real boss in a country where the government doesn’t account for much.
Two years before the 2011 Arab uprisings caught us all by surprise, my Lebanese friends were trying to alert me to what they believe is an Islamist penchant for dominating and overpowering state institutions. “Your bullshit American coverage,” one of my friends once yelled at me at a Beirut dinner. “You don’t have to live here.”

But I was focused on being an objective journalist. Now when I see the Islamist v. secular debate raging in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, I realize I overlooked the signs back in 2009.

The old order of autocracy crushing Islamist opposition is no more and after nearly 80 years of dominating the Islamist imagination, the Muslim Brotherhood has proved to be inept, deceptive and duplicitous in government.

If the Arab world is caught in the throes of an Islamist v. secular debate these days, it’s something they have to sort out, it’s not my business.

One thing I do know after all these years of covering post-colonial countries. Many of the roots of these conflicts, crises and civil wars go back to the critical political transition years – after independence or the fall of a political system. If the local founding father or Big Man was corrupt, bigoted or autocratic, for instance, the effects of his legacy will be felt years, if not decades, later.

Egypt’s democratic transition after Hosni Mubarak’s ouster has been rushed, manipulated and compromised – we all know that. We can hardly defend the “will of the people” after an election was pushed through before robust constitutional guarantees, allocation of powers among the branches of government, and institutional accountability between governments and citizens were put in place. In the end, Egypt may not be post-apartheid South Africa. But let’s give the Egyptians a shot – coup or no coup or whatever you want to call it.

Newshounding the World

Al Libi’s gone and Pakistan blasts perfidious foreigners bumping off perfidious foreigners on sovereign soil

A US drone strike on Monday targeted al Qaeda’s No. 2 Abu Yahya al Libi in Pakistan’s lawless North Waziristan.

Targeted killings of Islamist militants can be a tricky thing. I can’t count the number of times I’ve had to resurrect cold dead Islamist militants in Pakistan. I simply call it the Lazarus syndrome.

To be fair, the Lazarus syndrome is not exclusive to Pakistan. I’ve encountered it in Nigeria too, where I profiled “The Boko Haram terror chief who came back from the dead”.

But this time, I believe they got al Libi. Why? Because US officials took a day to confirm it and a senior Pakistani Taliban leader told Reuters that the killing of al Libi in a US drone strike was a “big loss”. Nothing like a militant confirming the assassination of a fellow jihadist brother in arms.



Now, whenever there’s a drone strike anywhere in Pakistan – including the areas the government barely controls – you can be sure that Pakistani officials will condemn the strike.

And so they did – because some things never change.

Deputy US Ambassador to Pakistan Richard Hoagland was summoned to the Pakistani Foreign Ministry on Tuesday and read the condemnation and “violation of Pakistan's sovereignty'' act.

Now there’s one less nasty guy on sovereign Pakistani territory. And you know al Libi was not a lowbrow nasty – he urged hapless Somalis to attack African Union troops, he called for attacks in Europe in revenge for the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, he...I could go on, but you get the picture. Or just read this May 2008 New York Times article.

‘CIA doctor’ and little guys get the rap

So, in many ways, official Pakistani criticism of the al Libi strikes is similar to the condemnation of last year’s raid in Abbottabad, that got bin Laden – right under the nose of Pakistan’s all-powerful military-intelligence honchos.

That pissed off the military-intelligence establishment so thoroughly, they arrested the Pakistani doctor who allegedly helped confirm bin Laden’s presence in that Abbottabad haveli to the CIA, earning him the moniker “CIA doctor” in his homeland.



Needless to say, the CIA is a nasty term in Pakistan – as it is in most countries. So, being accused of helping the CIA is not an endearment in this vociferously US-hating nation. Of course senior Pakistani officials – including ISI big guns – cooperate with the CIA, but never mind.

The Pakistani doctor must have been paid by the CIA, but it’s probably a lot less than the US military aid to the Pakistani military-intelligence establishment. As I said, never mind.

In Pakistan – as in all too many countries – the little guys get the rap.

And so Dr. Shakeel Afridi was sentenced last month to 33 years in jail after he was found guilty of treason under Pakistan's archaic system of tribal justice.

Leading activists says Pakistani intelligence plotted her assassination

Now one of the Pakistani human rights activists who expressed concern over the denial of due process to Dr. Afridi was Asma Jahangir, one of the country’s most distinguished human rights activists and a household name in Pakistan.



A Pakistani Supreme Court advocate, Jahangir has, at various times, served as the UN Special Rapporteur on Religious Freedom, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial and Summary Executions, the head of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, and president of the Supreme Court Bar Association of Pakistan.
When it comes to my personal list of top 10 brave women, Jahangir is up there. She’s been imprisoned in former Pakistani military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq’s jails and she’s faced death threats aplenty for some of her high profile cases – including defending a Christian accused of blasphemy and an infamous honor killing case.

One of her new clients is Pakistan's former ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani, who is accused of being behind a mysterious memo that sought US help to stave off a coup in Pakistan, a charge Haqqani denies.

Jahangir is no stranger to death threats from Islamist extremists and she’s not one to unnecessarily play up a threat. So, imagine the shock when one of the country’s best-known lawyers publicly reveals that she has received information that the security establishment is planning to carry out a "murderous attack" on her.

According to Jahangir, “a credible source” informed her about a "murderous attack" planned on her by state agencies, following which she had restricted her movements and decided to remain at home.

She contended that the plan to kill her had been hatched at the "highest level" of state agencies, which were apparently angered by her efforts to highlight human rights violations by security forces in the restive province of Baluchistan.

Allegations of Pakistan’s shadowy military-intelligence complex targeting Pakistani civilians are not new.

They came to the forefront last year when the body of Pakistani journalist Saleem Shahzad was found dumped in the plush, highly secured F-6/2 neighborhood of Islamabad. The military establishment – darkly known as “deep state in Pakistan – was widely believed to be responsible.



In an interview with the German international broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Jahangir was asked if she thought “the ISI and other security agencies could kill an internationally renowned person like yourself?”

I’m going to quote her reply: “Let me remind you of our history. Prominent people have been killed in Pakistan just like in any other country. The difference between Pakistan and other countries is that in Pakistan nobody ever knows who is responsible for these murders.”

In a country where the military-intelligence establishment is widely believed to bump off law-abiding but troublesome citizens, it’s not the person killed that matters as much as who’s done it.

If it happens to be the so-called “deep state” or militant groups aided or abetted by the omnipotent security network, it’s A-okay – it’s a home crowd after all, not those perfidious foreigners taking off other perfidious foreigners in our sovereign, un-administered land.