When, after the assassination of Anwar Sadat in October 1981, Gen. Hosni Mubarak came in power in Egypt, certain Muslim sections thought that he would learn some lesson from the ultimate end of Sadat. By signing the Camp David Agreement, Sadat had sold the interests of Egyptians along with those of Palestinians. By mortgaging Egypt to America, he had left Egypt’s security at the mercy of Israel – an act that agitated the Egyptian army, who killed Sadat during an army function. It was thought that Mubarak would loosen the bondage of American slavery. But he didn’t, nor could he do as by signing Camp David, Egypt had fallen totally in the grip of America and Israel. Mubarak was commanded to protect the interests of Israel, not to let Islamic and democratic forces raise their head, keep Ikhwan al-Muslimoon crushing. Mubarak did exactly this. As a return, he started getting commission on one-sided trade, army and civil agreements with American and European companies, the commission amount was credited to his account in a regular manner, and thus his personal wealth started getting accumulated.
Feeling same, strategy different
The modest but helpless people of Egypt kept on bearing all this for thirty years but at last took to the streets. This feeling and emotion of the Egyptian people, according to its reality, was the same to which Sadat had fallen prey in 1981, but the method of expression was quite different. The method adopted in 1981 earned criticism from some circles, in which the west was on the front; but there was no room, not at all, for any criticism from any circle on the method adopted in 2011. The movement of Tahrir Square was in strict accordance with the western democratic standard. But this also remains the fact that the hurt America and its old and new allies have been feeling with the change being effected by their own method, was not the same with the army method in 1981; rather then they had an opportunity to unleash the propaganda that “this is the Islamic way of change”. But now the so-called democratic forces the world over have become confounded. Therefore, these forces are active in halting the rise of Islamic change and in making efforts to retain in whatsoever form may be the American system of Mubarak. These forces are outside Egypt and inside as well. And pronouncement of this minor punishment to Mubarak is part of those efforts because the present courts and their judges are remnants of that system.
Hosni Mubarak had said
In the early years after 1981 Hosni Mubarak wanted to learn some lesson from the end of his predecessor Anwar Sadat. It was during those days that Egypt hosted a conference of Rabita Alam-e-Islami (Muslim World League), in which leaders and representatives of Islamic Movements from all over the world participated. On his return home from that conference, former Amir Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, Maulana Muhammad Yusuf, during an informal talk, said that during the conference Hosni Mubarak met some selected leaders of Islamic Movement and told them that he was not against Islam and wanted that Ikhwan al-Muslimoon and other Islamic groups cooperated with his government so that conflict can be avoided and his governance might sail smoothly with two-side remissions. Late Maulana Yusuf also expressed his feeling that Hosni Mubarak was under great pressure from America – and later on it was evident from the actions of Mubarak that whatever he was doing was in allegiance to America, and that he was compelled to do so – it was as if Mubarak had submitted himself voluntarily to the American slavery, the insulting punishment of which was bound to greet him. But the due punishment for his crimes is yet to be pronounced.
07//06/12 khabar-O-Nazar by Parwaaz Rahmani, sehrozaDAWAT, translated by: Abu Yusuf