Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

The Military Council and the Political Chaos in Egypt

The current events in Egypt reflect a genuine spat between the military council and the United States about the future of Egypt after the ousting of Hosni Mubarak’s regime. The US wants the political life to be under civilian control and the military to remain in their barracks to act as a safety valve and a guardian over the kufr values and “civil state”. The military, therefore, does not have the right to interfere in public affairs unless the interests of the United States are threatened. These interests are linked with the manner in which the country is going to be governed  and how the Israel- Egypt peace treaty is going to be secured.  To accomplish these objectives, America does not mind retaining some privileges for the military leaders. However, the military council continues to act in the way it used to before the “25 Feb Revolution”. Like the leaders of the Algerian military, the military council attempts to keep wielding power in public affairs and domestic politics from behind the scenes.  It did not understand the nature of the plans of the new phase, which the United States has been executing since the so called ‘Arab Spring was ignited in the region. America is working towards satisfying the desire of the people to rule themselves by themselves, but according to the kufr thoughts and rules, without any interference by the military and without an explicit projection of the “Islamic” rulers’ collaboration with America. The clearest explanation of this conflict was indicated by the former President of the United States, Jimmy Carter. After meeting with Field Marshal Muhammad Hussein Tantawi and other members of the military council last month, Carter expressed his doubts about the readiness of the military leaders to handover all authority to the newly elected parliament or the constitutional assembly that is expected to be chosen. In his conversation with the military rulers, Carter said, they repeatedly insisted that they foresaw only: “harmonious agreement” between the military and elected civilians. “When I say, ‘Suppose there is a strong difference of opinion, how will it be resolved?’ that always kind of creates a quandary,” he said. Still, Carter said he was optimistic that the outcome of negotiations would nonetheless constitute a major step towards what is called the civilian democracy. “I think it is probably going to be inevitable, and I don’t think it is going to be detrimental for the military to retain some special status,” he said.