Brother vs Brother?: A Generation Gap in the Muslim Brotherhood

Hi everyone!

I came across an interesting article in today's New York Times Magazine about a gentleman named Mohamed Beltagy. Mr. Beltagy is a doctor and a popular leader within the Muslim Brotherhood, which incidentally won 40 percent of the seats in the new Egyptian parliament.

The article discusses the conflict brewing within the Brotherhood between its moderate members--like Mr. Beltagy--and the hardliners who have traditionally been the more dominant faction. Because of this, many fear that any government majority comprised of hardcore Islamists is going to result in a repressive society, a fact that would appear to contradict the democratic values upon which the Egyptian protest movement was founded. It's disappointing that the youth movement, at least from a political perspective, appears to have lost its influence. The party it backed in the recent elections barely registered with voters who turned out in droves to elect a parliament that is at least 65 percent Islamist.

While the Muslim Brotherhood came out with the majority of votes, not too far behind it are the Salafists who advocate strict religious rule...a theocracy if you will. It would appear then that there should be a modicum of overlapping values between these two political parties. But, as the article points out, there is not. In fact, although the Brotherhood claims to have abandoned its more fundamentalist leanings--at least for the sake of elections--the Salafists have hardened their more extremist stance. This poses an obvious problem for the future, let alone stability, of any Egyptian government. If the two leading parties are unable to compromise for the sake of a united and stable parliament, it just gives the military council (SCAF) further reason not to step down as promised in June. In fact, when the unofficial election results started to trickle in late last month, the military revised its position and said it would not step down and would in fact take control of the writing of the Constitution.

But there are other, perhaps more immediate concerns as well...or if not concerns per se, then questions. Where, for example, has the Brotherhood been in the most recent bout of protests? A year ago, the Brotherhood was a dominant presence in Tahrir Square, serving--according to New York Times writer Robert Worth--as a sort of makeshift security apparatus, frisking anyone who came to the protests before allowing them into the square, etc. This is no longer the case. In fact, the Brotherhood has consciously put distance between itself and the protests, at least from an external perspective. The reasons for this are about murky as the politics.

Many believe that most of the top dogs in the Brotherhood (who are used to a strong military involvement in government)  are not necessarily as adamant about getting rid of the military as are the younger generation, or for example, Mr. Beltagy. The military is still viewed by many older Egyptians as a stabilizing presence without which many fear anarchy. This may just be a case of better the devil you know...

But it does give cause for concern. The Brotherhood appears to be contradicting itself. In response to the most recent spate of violence that left at least 10 dead and hundreds more wounded, the Brotherhood spoke out against the violence--which it conceded was committed at the hands of the military--while telling protesters that their efforts would be better served by going to the polls and encouraging others to do the same. While elections are certainly an important part of the democratic process, if the military ultimately refuses to step down and widespread violence once again returns to Tahrir Square, on what side of the conflict is the Brotherhood going to find itself? After a year of dramatic change and continued uncertainty, the Egyptian public are not going to stand for a parliament--elected for the first time by the public--that sits on the fence and does nothing.

And as for that conflict within the Muslim Brotherhood between moderates like Mr. Beltagy and the traditional hardline cohort, many predict that once the Brotherhood is firmly in power, the moderates are going to be pushed out in favor of the old school...or the old madrassah, as it were. The hardline Brothers will align themselves with the hardline Salafists and you'll have a theocracy like Iran at worst, or Saudi Arabia at best, which isn't saying much.

The one-year anniversary of Tahrir Square is this Wednesday, the 25th. The new Parliament is also supposed to sit for the first time this week. Whatever happens, Egypt is definitely in the spotlight once again.

Ciao.

The Russian Elections

Hi everyone! I'm coming to you today from my family's weekend getaway house in Galena, Illinois, about a 3-hour drive northwest of Chicago, right on the Illinois/Iowa/Wisconsin tri-state area. It's a beautiful Frank Lloyd Wright-inspired house situated on sixteen acres of secluded woodland with an eagle's eye view of the surrounding countryside. It is indeed the perfect country retreat and I am very happy to be out here for the weekend, getting in some much-needed R&R.

What's on my mind today? I've been following the news out of Russia. It seems that Vladimir Putin is in trouble of losing his grip on his decade-long control of Kremlin politics. This week's elections, which were essentially intended to cement support for Putin's United Russia party in advance of his election to become president again in March, proved (perhaps unsurprisingly) to be a rather corrupt affair, with allegations (and photographic proof) of ballot box stuffing and the like on behalf of Putin. The interesting thing, however, is that despite these allegations, United Russia still faired rather poorly with only some 50% of all votes cast in favor of the party. Speculation is that without these criminal tactics, United Russia would have done even worse. So...what does this say about Putin's chances of becoming President again in 2012? I'm thinking at this point it's a shoo-in, especially as Putin's personal approval ratings are still quite high despite the middling performance of his party at the polls. But, with a massive protest scheduled to hit Red Square on Saturday, and fearful whisperings of an Arab Spring-type revolution in the making, I'd think Putin and his Kremlin cronies might be a little less smug about their chances. Putin's accusation that Hilary Clinton was at the forefront of stirring up the anti-United Russia pot just smacks of desperation...well, maybe not desperation exactly but it doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

I'm curious to know what others think, especially those of you who are reading this blog in Russia. I know there's at least a few of you. I'm curious to know your in-the-trenches perspective. Are any of you planning to be at the protest tomorrow? If so, post a comment. Let me know what you're thinking. Let's get a discussion going. I have my own opinion about democracy in Russia--not unlike that alluded to in my post the other day about the democracy movement in the Middle East--but I'm curious to know your thoughts. Can a country as vast and diverse as Russia in terms of landscape and ethnicity with no real historical experience with democracy be expected to function as a Western-style democracy...or does it need a strong man-type (like Putin) to keep the country together? Share your opinions.

Oh...and my holiday party last night was great, thanks! Leslie, Shannon, Heather, Tom, Melissa, Craig, Mom and Dad and the family---thanks for coming over! The shrimp skewers came out okay after all and there was plenty of food and drink to go around! Cheers!

Ciao.

QUESTION OF THE DAY: "What are your thoughts and opinions about the elections in Russia? Should Putin be allowed to run as President in 2012? Why or why not?"