Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - June 21, 2012, Winnipeg, Manitoba C M Y K PAGE A15 F ROM the moment the Egyptian regime was toppled in February 2011, the nation's military and its Islamic democrats were set on a collision course. Now we're seeing the crash. Aided by a Constitutional Court ruling rolling back parliamentary elections, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has dissolved parliament and appointed 100 " experts" to write a new constitution. For good measure, the military stripped the powerful Egyptian presidency of existing powers - just in time, because the next day it became clear that Mohammed Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, had won the presidency. Parliament plans to convene next week with its own constitutional committee. Egypt is far beyond constitutional crisis: it is teetering on the edge of collapse. For those who greeted last year's Arab Spring with excitement and optimism, it may be surprising that the central conflict in Egyptian politics is between the military and the Islamists. After all, it was a cross- section of Egyptian society, galvanized and to some degree led by young secularists, that brought the country to a standstill and a longserving dictator to his knees. In demanding freedom, Egypt seemed to have reclaimed its historic position at the vanguard of the Arab world. But experienced observers knew that the Egyptian situation was far more complicated than it seemed from Tahrir Square. For one thing, the protesters didn't actually bring down Hosni Mubarak. By refusing to leave the square even under violent pressure from the police, they weakened the president drastically. It was the army that delivered the coup de grace. Alone, the protesters probably could not have forced him to resign. By declaring Mubarak's presidency over, the military asserted that it was ultimately in charge. This decision to jettison Mubarak did not stem from ideals, but from the fact that Mubarak was old and there was no easy transition in sight. The military council was gambling that it could ride out the wave of public unrest more effectively without the figurehead of traditional autocracy. As for the Islamists, they rallied to the cause of the Arab Spring only very late in the game. The Muslim Brotherhood knew perfectly well that most of the people in Tahrir Square were not its constituents. Nearly a century of resistance to Egypt's autocrats had taught the Brothers that quiescence, not revolt, was the way to stay alive. Yet the Brotherhood came up with a brilliant strategy - to gain power through democratic action. A protest movement, no matter how broadbased, is not the same as a formal election. Demonstrations involve speaking up, spontaneous action and bravery. Politics requires deep organization, legwork and stolid respectability. The Brotherhood believed, correctly, that regime change would lead to an election. And they knew they could shine. Since the Algerian elections of 1990, Islamic democrats had won the majority of the seats they contested in every even modestly free election in the Arabic- speaking world. The Brothers were lucky. The revolutionaries of Tahrir Square were instinctual democrats. Whether out of sincerity, naivet� or a combination, they demanded elections that were sure to deny them power. The military went along. The Brotherhood won the biggest share in the parliament - and now it has won the presidency, too. So the army represents the traditional power structure in Egypt, and the Brotherhood represents the will of the people. Their clash is the real thing: a head- to- head confrontation between autocratic force and popular majoritarianism. Its resolution will determine the future of democracy in the entire Arab world. The struggle could be peacefully resolved in several ways - none very likely. The Brotherhood could fold, accepting the position of token power under the thumb of the military, as its Moroccan wing has done under King Muhammad VI. This would mean sacrificing credibility as well as ideology. If the Brotherhood were to accept a subordinate position, it would squander its opportunity to marry religious legitimacy with constitutional democracy - its goal for two decades. Alternatively, in a perfect Brotherhood world, the public would return to the streets in opposition to the army and the Supreme Council could back down, accepting the Brotherhood's electoral victory in exchange for a promise to allow the military to keep its $ 1 billion- plus in annual U. S. aid. The difficulty is that a substantial minority - 48 per cent - of Egyptians voted for the military's preferred presidential candidate, Ahmed Shafik. Given the extent of its public support, there is little reason for the army to go gently. Nor will it be content to control a U. S.- bankrolled military fiefdom - the generals know that over time, the Brotherhood will try to change the army by urging the promotion of younger, Islamist officers. There is one model for compromise between the Brotherhood and the military: Turkey since the Justice and Development Party took power in 2002. The Turkish military has gradually lost its controlling place, a fact the Supreme Council will not ignore. But Turkey is comparatively rich, stable and happy - and that, too, is relevant. Egyptians would also do well to recall the example of Algeria. After the first contemporary Arab democratic experiment took place there two decades ago, the military reacted to Islamist victory by reversing the electoral results and declaring martial law. The war that followed lasted for years. More than 100,000 people were killed in vicious fighting. Unless the Brotherhood and the military find common ground, Egypt will be on a similar path. Noah Feldman, a law professor at Harvard University is a Bloomberg View columnist. Exposing big lies Bravo to Sidney Green and the Free Press for speaking and printing the truth ( The value of public spending , June 16). First, Green exposed the big lie that wars end recessions and depressions. Government spending ends recessions, and that is the point he so clearly makes. We don't have to make tanks, guns and bullets to end economic stagnation, but we should spend money on education and infrastructure. Second, Green attacks head on the unbelievable notion that you can end a recession through cutbacks. Even a novice student of economics sees the absurdity of this notion. Cutbacks create unemployment and hence reduce spending. Remember John Maynard Keynes? This increase in unemployment increases inequality. Witness the omnibus bill war in Ottawa. To be sure, Green's is a voice in the wilderness. That's how big lies work. They are perpetuated by huge monied interests and the political parties that represent them. Dissenting views are rarely featured in the media and honest debate is suppressed. Believers in more government spending and higher taxes for the rich are branded as socialists, and we wouldn't want socialism, would we? BOB MILAN Winnipeg Bearing the truth Animal rights activists decry province's release of bear cub ( June 20). Makoon the bear cub has only himself to blame for his exile. He forgot the most important rule of government officials - if you want something from our provincial government, you have to supply Jets tickets. The only explanation I can give as to why he did not offer this incentive is he that was an honest cub. Notice I said " was." The bush does not take any prisoners if you cannot fight back. JACK MARTIN Winnipeg �� I think that we should accept the experts' opinion of when to release a wild animal back into its natural environment. In the same way, we should accept the expert opinion of when to release a puppy back into its natural domestic environment. Trust, or at least try to trust, the experts. No one wants either animal to fail when released into its natural environment, but timing, I think, means the difference between survival and failure. KAT THOMPSON Winnipeg �� Why has no one tied this government's hypocritical stance on this wildlife and nature issue to their " holier than thou" stance on wildlife and nature when trying to defend their ludicrous decisions on the hydro line paths? ROB WALKER Winnipeg Uninformed policy Moira Honey asks the question, " Have citydwellers become so far removed from our food sources that this could actually occur at a garden centre?" ( Food for thought , Letters, June 14). To answer; yes, and then some. As a food producer, what concerns me even more is that some of these uninformed individuals will get into politics and become our future leaders, dictating policy as to how our food is to be produced. Oh, it's too late, it's already happened. MICHAEL CISZEWSKI Sandy Hook Time for debate In their June 18 letters ( Undemocratic action), Gerri Thorsteinson and Doreen Kerr deride Bill C- 38 as overreaching and undemocratic. They tell us that the bill is too large to debate but produce no reason why this is so. The bill was introduced on Jan. 23, 2012. There were Commons debates at second reading on May 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 14. The standing committee on finance met to consider the bill on May 15, 16, 17, 28, 29, 30, 31, June 1, 4 and 5. The committee report was tabled June 7. The Commons met to consider the report June 11, 12 and 14. The bill still has to be presented for third reading in the Commons and then go to the Senate for full consideration there. A dozen sound arguments, properly presented, could have swayed public opinion in favour of the opposition. Creating more than 800 motions to delete clauses from the bill was ridiculous. The highlight of the ensuing voting marathon was when Elizabeth May lost track of proceedings and found herself voting with the government. Opposition members failed to capture public attention and support. They failed democracy through their inability to articulate reasons why the bill should not pass as presented. Democracy survived; the official opposition might not. JOHN FELDSTED Winnipeg Good time to deal Re: Eavesdropping in airports on hold: Toews ( June 20). I am intrigued to read that the plan to eavesdrop on passenger conversations at airports is on hold until the federal privacy commissioner conducts a review. I trust the government is not really that interested in knowing whether I go to the bathroom one more time before boarding. Since this news has been splattered across the pages of every major newspaper in the country, however, I'm sure individuals wishing to make a drug deal will head for the nearest airport. VIC UNRUH Winnipeg Too quick to judge We look at how the Greeks have handled their economy and wonder how they could be so stupid. They even hired experts to cook their books, and they surely had to know that the consequences would be bad, probably extremely bad, and possibly calamitous. But maybe we're too quick to judge. The Government of Canada is cutting environmental research, and action on climate change is minimal. The oil companies have even hired experts to tell us climate change is imaginary. And for years credible scientists have informed us that the consequences of inaction will be bad, probably extremely bad, and possibly calamitous. How stupid can we be? HARTLEY STINSON Winnipeg Ignoring family pain Re: Getting away with murder ( June 16). So defence attorney Greg Brodsky admits to helping some criminals get away with murder. But he does not seem to consider what this does to victims' families. Of course, Brodsky's excuse is that he finds and uses all the legal technicalities in our imperfect laws. Why doesn't he use his talents to help victims and their families get justice instead of giving more pain to the families? No, that's the job of the prosecution and, he'll say, it's the fault of our lawmakers. But it still hurts. ARSENIO HUYPUNGCO Winnipeg HAVE YOUR SAY: The Free Press welcomes letters from readers. Include the author's name, address and telephone number. Letters may be edited. Letters to the Editor, 1355 Mountain Avenue, Winnipeg, R2X 3B6. Fax 697- 7412. Email letters@ freepress. mb. ca Letters represent the opinions of their writers and do not reflect the opinions of the Winnipeg Free Press or its staff. �� LETTER OF THE DAY I thought the June 19 column by Reis Pagtakhan, Foreigners are valued customer s, was brilliant. His keen mind and insight into the situations in which our government puts these people and the fact that we compete with the world is a breath of fresh air. The concept of government employees offering customer service is novel yet wonderful. The problem with this is that 95 per cent of the people who choose to work for the government, at whatever level they have managed to achieve, have no idea about service, or customers. The reasons for seeking a job with the civil service are varied, but the job security and high pay for very little real work are among them. Providing service and helping people probably never entered into the minds of the vast majority. They probably didn't even expect to interface with anyone other than other civil servants. The big problem Canadians face is that the civil service is so large and so set in its ways that have developed for 70- plus years that no one can seem to address its problems. The Harper Conservatives have been good in attempting to control government spending in a slash- and- burn kind of way. No one will ever accuse them of really seeing the big picture or being good managers; they just want to cut back spending at all costs. If they were to look at something as big as the civil service and really try to improve it at the same time as cutting, they might get a real bounce with many Canadians. Everything from water issues and lack of management in government departments that fail at every level to the immigration problems Pagtakhan mentions should be under the microscope in a management review. SCOTT MALABAR Winnipeg Winnipeg Free Press Thursday, June 21, 2012 A 15 POLL �� TODAY'S QUESTION Would you jump into the Red River to save someone in trouble? �� Vote online at winnipegfreepress. com �� PREVIOUS QUESTION What's your opinion of the government's airport surveillance plans? I thought airport conversations were already monitored. 9% ( 399 votes) If you've nothing to hide, why worry? 33% ( 1,498 votes) I don't like it. Smells like a violation of privacy to me. 33% ( 1,480 votes) There is no privacy anymore, except in your mind. And they're probably already working on thought police. 25% ( 1,135 votes) TOTAL VOTES: 4,512 Winnipeg Free Press est 1872 / Winnipeg Tribune est 1890 VOL 140 NO 218 2012 Winnipeg Free Press, a division of FP Canadian Newspapers Limited Partnership. Published seven days a week at 1355 Mountain Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba R2X 3B6, PH: 697- 7000 BOB COX / Publisher MARGO GOODHAND / Editor JULIE CARL / Deputy Editor ADRIAN WYLD / THE CANADIAN PRESS Harper: ' good in a slash- and- burn kind of way.' Civil servants must serve DEAR EDITOR: One has to give credit to Immigration Minister Jason Kenney for staying on message. In the face of this week's demonstrations across the country and mounting criticism from health care professionals, church leaders and refugee advocates, he doggedly defends his severe cuts to the interim federal health program for refugees here. One has to wonder at his method for doing this. Despite the obvious - that the cuts affect government- chosen and supported refugees and privately sponsored refugees as well as refugee claimants - he reverts always to his standard answer that points only to refugee claimants and says they should not get more health benefits than Canadians. This dissembling statement that plays loosely with the truth and panders to prejudice. Kenney refuses to discuss the withdrawal of benefits from his own government's sponsored refugees ( about 7,000 a year and sometimes chosen by Canada precisely because of their medical needs), or the withdrawal of health benefits from privately sponsored refugees that have been usually sponsored by faith groups. He abandons his own " children" who have nowhere else to turn, and he saddles the churches of Canada with a new and unexpected liability. There are 34,000 privately sponsored refugees waiting in overseas processing queues. Probably two- thirds of them will ultimately be selected by Canada's overseas officers and eventually get here. The majority of these were sponsored through agreements between various churches and the government under which Ottawa committed to provide the IFH coverage. The government will now apparently be in breach of these agreements, and it will be interesting to see what legal ramifications may follow in the weeks ahead. Quick to condemn his critics, Kenney earlier this month castigated me personally on these pages for " inflammatory" remarks in a previous column and said that I had entirely missed the point. But it is the minister himself who refuses to address the point, always pointing instead at refugee claimants. Perhaps the minister intends to relent and to exempt government and privately sponsored refugees from the IFH cuts. He has said nothing about this. Time will tell. It is sad that Kenney has become the first immigration minister in memory to use refugee claimants as fodder in a them- and- us scenario around health benefits. Canada has been a proud signatory to the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees, and we have been accustomed to immigration ministers of the past who were defenders of its commitments, and of the world's refugee victims who land on our shores. TOM DENTON Hospitality House Refugee Ministry Winnipeg Kenney's refugee claims pander to prejudice Egyptian collapse is likely By Noah Feldman A_ 15_ Jun- 21- 12_ FP_ 01. indd A15 6/ 20/ 12 5: 55: 51 PM ;