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
No comments:
Post a Comment