Strange Days

Map credit, Al Jazeera

Dear readers

Of course, it is a relief to know the end of the Libyan civil war is near. The Libyan rebels seem to have occupied the capital, which means the war is likely to end soon.

A few notes of caution. Qadaffi has said he will fight to the end. This could drag on for a period.

Further, I was nonplussed by the appearance of Saif Al Islam. It makes the rebels seem unreliable if they (and the ICC) claim to have three Qadaffi scions in custody, and then one appears.

Finally, who are the rebels? Are they being supported by the CIA or even scarier, Saudi Arabia or Al Qaeda, or are they in fact legitimate freedom fighters? I hope that the rebels in Libya are secular civilians who support democracy and are not racist or tribal. (See tribal map above) But time will tell.

As I have learned the hard way from studying African politics, the rebels are not always the good guys, i.e. Renamo in Mozambique. Worse still rebels can come in well, and become dictators, i.e. Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

Is Qadaffi worse than Bashir in Syria? Why is the US supporting Libya while ignoring the bloody and autocratic crackdown in Syria. Is it the oil? Will Saif asl Islam try to make a coalition with Islamists that will push Libya, secular under Qadaffi, towards a Wahabi future.

Here is some more reading

R2P Nato lies!
http://crossedcrocodiles.wordpress.com/2011/08/13/r2p-nato-too-lie/

Snipers Fight on at Qadaffi's compound
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/08/2011824688335330.html

Al Azhar's grand sheikh congratulates Libyans
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/489110

Don't Call Us Rebels
http://blogs.aljazeera.net/africa/2011/07/08/dont-call-us-rebels-0

Libya's uncertain future
http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/libyas-uncertain-future

"Virginity Testing" by Egyptian Army

On March 23, 2011, Amnesty International issued a report that there were forced 'virginity tests' inflicted by the Egyptian Army upon women protesters arrested in Tahrir Square during a March 9 protest. This protest turned violent when plainclothes men attacked protesters, and the Army forcefully cleared the square.

Allegedly, at least 18 women were held in military detention, beaten, given electric shocks, strip searched, photographed by male soldiers and the subjected to virginity tests, all followed by being charged with prostitution. This apparently took place in a Cairo Museum annex, where some of the women were beaten with sticks and hoses. For more details, and both articles on this, see Amnesty International Egypt Reports. 

My colleague SO reminds me that  Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (my favorite document) is the cornerstone provision of any discussion of torture. According to Article 5 of the UNDH,

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Yet, this is exactly what happened to these women.

On May 30th, 2011, Shahira Amin writing for CNN broke the story that a senior Egyptian general admits that 'virginity checks' were performed on women arrested at a demonstration this spring. At the time of the Amnesty International report, Major Amr Imran of the Egyptian Army denied that virginity tests had been conducted. But an anonymous senior general admitted that such tests were conducted and defended the practice.

I quote from the CNN article Egyptian general admits 'virginity checks' conducted on protesters.

"The girls who were detained were not like your daughter or mine," the general said. These were girls who had camped out in tents with male protesters in Tahrir Square, and we found in the tents Molotov cocktails and drugs. The general said the virginity checks were done so that the women wouldn't later claim they had been raped by Egyptian authorities."  

According to the Daily Star of Lebanon, SCAF spokesman  General Ismail Etman reiterated the judgement of the women, stating that "there were girls with young men in one tent. Is this rational? There were drugs; pay attention!"

I do not even know how to respond to these comments, as they upset me at so many different and visceral levels. Encouragingly, the response to this outrageous line of reasoning has been dramatic. In heartening news, Egyptian activists have called for demonstrations to condemn the incident. A day of online protest is planned today, Wednesday, to voice outrage against the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces.

Ironically, when this issue first surfaced and I raised it to my class, the students, who were mostly women, believed that the women who spoke out were lying. This is a society where women's right to speak out and be heard in political matters is fragile, and emerging, and needs vigilant protection.  Indeed, according to an Egyptian newspaper, Al Masry Al Youm, the Egyptian military had the audacity to dismiss the CNN report. Yet, they have "vowed to investigate the matter," whatever that means . . . .

In addition, this morning a report by Rana Khazbak indicated  that Egypt's military prosecutors questioned journalists and a blogger for criticizing the SCAF with regard to this matter of torturing protests. Television anchor Reem Maged, journalist Nabil Sharaf al-Din and blogger Hossam el-Hamalawy were called in for questioning on Monday for "allegedly criticizing the military." Sharaf al-Din had alleged that the SCAF is involved in a secret deal with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamalawy accused the head of the military police of violating human rights. Maged characterized the interrogation as "intimidation for journalists." Military questions journalists

Given that the SCAF has already sentenced at least one blogger to prison for his critiques, and has been actively detaining activists and subjecting them to illegal military trials, these interviews with journalists must be viewed as a type of muzzling of the press.

With regard to the virginity testing matter, the United Nations Convention Against Torture was adopted by the General Assembly on December 9, 1975. Article 1 of that document defines torture as follows

For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. 

It seems clear from this definition that the 18 women protesters were subjected to an act of severe pain and suffering, both physical and mental at the hands of a public official, namely the Egyptian military. Further, the convention indicates that

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

Accordingly, on the face of the matter, the Generals' comments that the women were "sharing a tent with men" do not justify this act of torture.  According to the Convention, all acts of torture are offenses under criminal law. The officers involved in this act should be tried accordingly. The convention was written in Arabic in its original text. As a result, all officials in the Arab world should be familiar with its contents. Further,  Egypt is a signatory of the Convention against Torture, and is therefore bound by the same.

According to New York lawyer SO,  one distinction can be made: i.e not all acts of "virginity testing" can be classified as acts of torture. Instead, under the same ambit of the Convention Against Torture -- vide Article 16, some of these acts could constitute "cruel [and/or] inhuman [and/or] degrading treatment or punishment." 

He notes that "The lynch pin for the definition of torture is the "severity" of the intentional infliction of physical or mental pain or suffering towards obtaining information from someone. In some cases, the acts of virginity testing could be considered torture. In others, depending on the facts, the acts could constitute "cruel and inhuman... treatment." Yet in others -- perhaps the majority -- said acts more acutely can be defined as "degrading treatment or punishment" under the convention. Articles 11, 12 and 13 as read with Article 16 (begin with Article 16 first), provide color on potential legal redress these ladies can obtain." 
 

Turning to the matter of the implicit oppression of women implied by these acts, it is a matter of fundamental human rights that women may participate in public gatherings and express their opinions. Under Articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,  "Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association." The word everyone is usually understood to include women.

I do not even want to grace the General's ignorant and deeply offensive comment that the women were in the same tent as men with a response, but here are a few thoughts. Even accounting for cultural differences in gender relations, this may easily be explained by the fact that it was night, and it was cold. Second, it does not imply that the women were engaged in any inappropriate behavior. Third, even if the women were engaged in so called "inappropriate behavior," however one may choose to define that, that still does not justify torture.

I also want to point out that testing the hymen for penetration is an absurdity. Vigorous exercise or even horse riding can break the hymen, so a young woman who has never had sexual intercourse or any interaction with men whatsoever could have a hymen that does not look "virgin." Furthermore, if the idea was to prevent later allegations of rape, then the police could have simply taken a statement from each woman regarding whether they had been raped or molested by any person in the course of the protest. In addition, we do not know what means these so called tests were conducted, but they sound quite physically painful, and they were clearly meant to humiliate as men and women both watched them be conducted, and the women were photographed by male soldiers during the event. Actually, this situation is beginning to sound like Abu Ghraib to me. Finally, as Amnesty International points out, when determining a case of rape, it is irrelevant whether or not the victim is a virgin.

Dan Murphy, writing in the Christian Science Monitor on June 1, 2011, points out that male protesters have been raped by state officials and that journalist Lara Logan was assaulted by pro-Mubarak operatives on February 13th. These actions remind us that rape and acts of sexual violence are crimes of power, not passion. As the elections in Kenya in 2007, and the violence in the Congo, Darfur and the Balkans have shown us, rape is a commonly used act of war and aggression.

I agree with Murphy, that the goal of this aggression is in part to prevent women from speaking their minds. But I think there is more at stake here. To use an economic lens, this approach "increases the cost" to protesters, both male and female, of opposing government actions. The physical abuse of both women and men by the Egyptian Military makes it more hazardous for women to participate in public assemblies, therefore reducing the number of people who can oppose the current military regime. I think Murphy over simplifies the case a bit, as the independent press in Egypt has in fact been outspoken about these atrocities.

Women in Egypt, the Middle East, and the entire world MUST have the right to protest, to write, to speak, and to express their political opinions. These female protesters have been subjected to torture, and an outrageous violation of the civil and human rights. The Generals' justifications of these actions are of the garden variety "Blame the Victim" style.

These actions by the SCAF to intimidate journalists, and detain and torture women (and men) are part of a pattern and practice of press intimidation, restrictive laws, military trials of civilians and physical abuse of protesters broadly calculated to reduce and control protests and public dissent. We must not tolerate this shocking suppression of the freedom to peaceably assemble.

Mohammed El Baradei: We are born with a call for freedom

Dear Readers

Sorry to gush, but today I met Mohamed El Baradei, Nobel Prize Winner, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and revolutionary. One of the really cool things about my current job is that I work with Dr. Laila El Baradei, who is the sister of MEB. I attended a lecture today organized by students. It was called the Leadership for Education and Development Program. The theme was "Political Activism." Mohamed El Baradei was one of the speakers. Here are the best effort I could make of notes from this event. The event was in Arabic, so I listened to the translator. Notes are mostly verbatim, but some places I summarize. These are indicated by [..] Cheers, WMB

Here is the very short Al Masry Al Youm article about it El Baradei calls for 50 strong civil consultative council.

"We do respect the Army's role because it was the protector of the revolution. Today, the Army could appoint a consultative council to help it govern. Transparency is the road to Democracy."

"Do we have the kind of parties that enrich the debate? No, we do not. It does not matter if we have a parliamentary or a presidential system. There is no perfect democracy in the world. Every day, we learn something new. It is so important to be critical, to think critically. The important thing is that you think. This is something the previous regime killed in us."

"[Law must change with the times] In the US, in 1954 they said segregation was constitutional. The Highest Court said segregation was constitutional. The same court in the 1970s said we need integration. In terms of politics in Egypt, we need a coalition. We don't necessarily want a proportional system if it will result in distortion. We want everyone to be represented. The electorate should feel you represent their interests."

"The recent law requiring that a party have 5000 signatures from 29 governorates and publish in two state owned papers is an obstruction. Each of these signatures must be publicly notarized.: This is an obstruction, an impediment. [The new parties should be allowed] Before we promulgate the laws, we need the laws to reflect the views of the people. We are still holding the old mindset. The laws are not like the scripture, or the Bible. We should be able to change. Do not restrict freedom of association."

"Democracy means respect of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The judiciary must be independent. Open the windows of democracy for freedom. Give the people the right to debate."

"In the 1971 Constitution, it said freedom of religious affiliation or belief is absolute."

"One half of Egyptians are below the poverty line. People went to the referendum because for the first time, they felt their voice was heard. One year when I finished working at the agency [IAEA] I defended the right of the Muslim Brotherhood to participate in politics. Each citizen should have the same rights or duties. Turkey has an Islami party but the country is completely secular. [This is the model we should follow] No one should impose his or her religious affiliation on anyone else."

"The youth are ready to hold office. I visited all the Eastern European states, their leaders are young, between 30 and 40."

"In a press conference, I said Egypt would live in this malady unless Mubarak was tried, or left the country. We should start with the head of corruption who is the former president.  There are 500 prominent figures who should be tried. Does it make sense that we have a camel battle during the Black Wednesday of the revolution? We err, but we need to learn from our mistakes. The only perfection is in God."

"The characteristic of democracy is that we do not need to take rushed decision. Take a slow decision with many views considered. I live near the pyramid side. I look at the luxurious buildings, and then the slum areas. We do a lot of injustice. How do we reduce the gap of poor and rich? We need access to education and health care. You have to know your budget, and allocate appropriately. The AUC graduates knowledgeable people. They need to help the poor. The short term goals of the country should be

• Education
• Health
• Housing
• Food

"We lack credibility with the people. If you are planting your fields, ensure a minimal level of food security. Our priorities today [must be to] build the Egyptian human being. [Help people] to live a decent life. I met John Kerry. I said that the money you spend on terrorism is squandered. The human being, when he loses hope in life, bombs himself. Help the young people meet their aspirations, and they will not be terrorists."

"Can we say that whole nationalities should be denied entry to Egypt? We should think rationally. In the past it used to take us a year to get a visa to Western countries. [We should not repeat that mistake]."

"The constitutional referendum was controversial. It was not proceeded by national dialogue. Would I have prevented [unclear] from seeking the presidency because his wife was French? No. We should think about what we are saying."

"I hope that we continue to put our faith in the Army. I do not object to the army itself, but rather to the Army as the [essence] of the state. Should we have mandatory military service? Obligatory enrollment in the Army for three years? All these issues are subject to discussion. The Army, Police Officers and Judiciary should vote. [They have not in the past] Maybe mandatory service is good, but we should discuss this. Maybe we need a reserve, or a volunteer service. I cannot give you the answer, but we need to have a public discussion of these issues."

"42% of Egyptians live under the poverty line, but realistically,90 percent of Egyptians are poor. We must guarantee people a free and dignified life. In 2010 the minimum wage was 35 LE  a month (about 7 dollars) Now it is 400 LE (about 80 dollars). The Editor in Chief of a Government Newspaper was making One million pounds a month (A lot, 250,000 dollars) It is not that the country is poor, but we need to redistribute the wealth."

"Article 2 of the Constitution. There is a great sensitivity to this. Article 2 does reflect Islamic principles. Equality and Justice are also Islamic principles. It is about the interpretation of the article. Let us focus on the real problems facing Egypt. I was in Cuba. The education rate there is 100% despite the American embargo of forty years. Castro's son chaired a program at UNESCO on how to reach out to people in villages to educate them."

Question from Audience: Do you think that Egyptian people are politically mature enough for democracy?
Answer. "The elite in Egypt has been polarized. But now, people are excited about the chance to vote. Many people voted in the referendum even though they were not well informed. [This is okay, people will learn as they exercise their right to vote.] Democracy is freedom and social justice. We are born with a call for freedom. It is inherent in us."

QFA: What should the position of the New Egypt be towards Israel? Answer: "Israel marginalized the Palestinians. The Arab World did not deal with the issue. There is no balance of power. Israel will come to us when Arab states become strong. Iran and Turkey are two strong states. A strong state is measured by what you contribute to world civilization. The Palestinian problem will not be solved in a military way. In the 40s, we had the Arab League. Recently, Arab regimes have become a joke."

QFA: Should we have a parliamentary or presidential system? Answer: "We need a popular consensus. We need an alternative to the authoritarian example. India is progressing ahead because it is a democracy. Unleash the powers and freedom of the human being."

QFA: Do you believe that Egypt can become an Islamic State? Answer: "We are always talking about mottos and slogans. Does religious reference mean we have divine and lofty values? Yes. If we believe in the true spirit of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, we must have good intentions. I met the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama says that prayer should be linked to action. Islam says that also. It is better to do an action, then spend the day in the mosque praying. When we speak of this political coalition [that should rule Egypt.] We should solve these problems within a humanitarian framework."

The Middle East Should Follow Egypt’s Lead Towards Democracy

A version of this article was published in the Clarion Ledger on March 27, 2011

Date: March 21, 2011


The change sweeping the Arab world is now entering into its second month. The people of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Jordan are demanding political representation, free speech and democracy. Only one Arab government other than Egypt is responding to the protests sweeping the region in a manner which respects the right of its people to participate in government: Jordan.

Indeed, in countries such as Yemen, Libya, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, the people's demands for change are being met not with reform, but with force, and violence. Protests began in Saudi Arabia this Friday asking for political reform including more representation for the people, and action against poverty. The Saudi government responded to this action by arresting and beating protesters. In Bahrain, protests started in which the majority (Shia) people asked to be involved in government decision making. In a disturbing development the Saudi and Emirati governments did not send troops to support the rebels in Libya, but did send troops into Bahrain to crush the protests. Protesters in southern Syria are also asking for political reform, including free speech and economic growth. The Syrian government is reacting by arresting dissidents. In Yemen, protests began at the beginning of March asking their authoritarian “president” to leave now, and not wait until the end of his term. Violence broke out in Yemen when snipers shot peaceful protesters. The president then imposed martial law.

The journey towards democracy in the Middle East and North Africa will be long, and full of obstacles. I suggest that analysts and readers think of the transformation sweeping the Middle East as a process, not an event. To examine the potential risks and rewards of this transformation, I consider the cases of Egypt and Libya as point and counterpoint: one country is moving swiftly towards democracy, while the other country is in the midst of a bloody civil war, and humanitarian disaster.

Egypt has taken the first of many steps towards a democratic transition. On January 25th, the Egyptian people spoke out. They demanded a change in leadership, and asked that an autocrat of thirty years step down. Their actions were largely peaceful, and they used the tools of non-violent resistance. They were rewarded on February 11th when President Hosni Mubarak left office. The Egyptian people refer to this period as the “January 25th Revolution.” Theorists point out that in fact, Egypt has not experienced a true revolution. According to Professor Steven Levitsky, a democracy expert at Harvard University's Department of Government, what Egypt is currently experiencing is more accurately termed a regime transition. At the moment in Egypt, the military is in power. Accordingly, Egypt has removed a dictator in the person of Hosni Mubarak but is currently being ruled by the Supreme Committee of the Armed Forces. Egypt has not emerged as a full-fledged democracy. Arguably the Egyptian people are still living under a form of semi-authoritarian rule, all though that rule is certainly liberalized with comparison to the previous government.

Nonetheless, Egypt is making excellent progress on its journey towards democracy. A constitutional referendum was held on Saturday, March 19, 2011. This represents the first major election ever held in Egypt. The election was marred by some drawbacks, and in my view, was not totally free and fair. Most importantly, not enough time was given for Egyptians to understand the meaning of their vote. Voters were "encouraged" by the Muslim Brotherhood with rice and oil to vote “Yes.” There were inadequate numbers of polling stations. Some polling stations erupted into violence, as when Nobel Prize Laureate Mohammed El Baradei was attacked with stones and glass when he attempted to vote. Yet, the successes of the Egyptian Constitutional Referendum of March 19, 2011, greatly outweighed the problems. Egyptian universities worked hard to train election monitors. A peaceful rally was held in Tahrir Square in which people tried to educate each other about the meaning of their vote. Soldiers provided protection for the protesters. The election was hotly debated in the press and the television: free speech is emerging. Most polling stations were peaceful. Normally boisterous Egyptians queued quietly as they awaited their first opportunity to cast a vote that "mattered."

In contrast to the peaceful and promising transition in Egypt, Libya is experiencing a violent outcome in response to people's demands to political liberalization. The Libyan uprising is entering its fourth week. The Libyan people must be praised for their determination, and persistence in the face of unrelenting force. Libya's leader, Colonel Muammar Qadaffi has responded to peaceful protests with brutal violence, hiring mercenaries, and ruthlessly targeting civilians. The unrest in Libya began on February 15, 201. The main reasons for the protests were the lack of political freedom, the spread of corruption under the Qadaffi regime, and the need to expand freedom of speech. Thousands turned out peacefully holding signs and chanting to challenge Colonel Muammar Qaddafi's 41 year strongman rule. Qadaffi responded by firing on the protesters, turning the situation into a bloody civil war between loyalists and rebels.

A broad campaign of airstrikes led by France, England and the US began pounding the Libyan coast on March 19, 2011. US missiles are attempting to enforce a United Nations no-fly zone to keep Qadaffi from crushing rebel forces. Some critics have expressed concerns that military intervention against Qadaffi could backfire badly, causing resentment in the region. There is a need, as expressed by writers in the Nation, and in AlJazeera, to balance the desire to act in solidarity with the rebels against the risk of harming civilians. In addition, the desire to support the rebels must be balanced against the need to support Arab self-determination.

Overall, the weight of history, humanitarianism, and self-determination fall on the side of intervention in Libya. Qaddafi’s efforts to frame the rebellion against him as a "Western Plot," play on a well worn fear and paranoia present in Arab states that they are not fully in control of their own destiny. It is important for regime change to be organic, and driven by the citizenry. Indeed, the failure of democracy to take root in Iraq can be blamed in large part on the fact that democracy was imposed by the West, not asked for by the Iraqis. This is not the case in Libya, where the people have clearly asked for the removal of Qaddafi through protests, and by fighting bravely alone although they have been outmanned and outgunned.

Further, international opinion is firmly on the side of intervention. On February 26, 2011, The UN Security Council correctly called for a no-fly zone in Libya. Such a no-fly zone should help the anti-Qadaffi rebels to regroup, and should limit Qadaffi's ability to respond to the uprising. On March 13, the Arab League endorsed the concept of a no-flight zone over Libya. On March 17, 2011, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution calling for military action in Libya. Obama wisely waited to initiate Western supported military action  until after the Arab nations agreed that a no-fly zone area should be enforced. This decision to wait until help was requested from regional powers respects the Arab need for self-determination, and also represents an international consensus that action was required.

A few key lessons can be drawn from the contrasting scenarios in Egypt and Libya. First, it is no accident that Egypt is one of the first Arab nations to liberalize. Egypt is basically a secular country. Egypt’s population includes Christians, and even a few Jews, and there is support for religious freedom for all citizens. Second, Rwanda taught us that genocide must be stopped. As Anne Marie Slaughter of Princeton has argued, the air strikes in Libya are in support of humanitarian grounds. Third, autocrats must not be tolerated, even if they are politically useful, or even if they have oil the West wants. In the short and medium run, human rights and democracy require that the United States stop tolerating autocratic and oppressive regimes such as those found in Saudi Arabia. Fourth, change must come from below. The Arab people have a right to self-determination. The West should respect that. President Obama and the UN were wise to wait to take action until they were asked by the Arab League. The UN has asked for a no-fly zone, not an international conflagration. The US should not commit ground troops, but should merely “soften the targets” so that the Libyan rebels have a fighting chance. Finally, the West can support protesters by sending money and supplies to non-profit organizations, political parties, and other civil society groups oriented towards reform. In addition, educational exchanges between academics and students can facilitate exchanges of ideas. Egypt should be viewed as a beacon for democracy in the region. Egypt is already exporting the idea of freedom by holding its historic vote this weekend. Any support the West can supply for democratization in Egypt can only lead to more reform and liberalization in the region.