The United Arab Emirates And the Muslim Brotherhood
By: Amina Abu Shehab Translated from Al-Khaleej (U.A.E.).
The Muslim Brotherhood's explicit policy of belligerence toward the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as a state and people once again exploits the superficial separation between the Brotherhood and the Egyptian state and institutions. This is allowing the Brotherhood to put on its partisan robes and directly attack the UAE as a state, while preventing a full-blown crisis from erupting between Egypt and the UAE.
About This Article
Summary :
Essam el-Erian, the vice chairman of Egypt's Freedom and Justice Party, has attacked the UAE's role in slowing the spread of his party's ideology throughout the region, highlighting the animosity between the two entities.
In a clear failure to adopt the mentality of a state predicated on rationality and statesmanship, Brotherhood members seem incapable of becoming true state leaders who have transcended their allegiance to a party. The party continues to be the focal point of policies adopted in Egypt, the state it has come to rule. It must come as a deep national disappointment for Egyptians to realize that Brotherhood members unleashing their unrestrained aggression - while ignoring other aspects of a political relationship built on Islam, Arabism and Gulf-Egyptian relations - can only be manifesting their ineptitude in assuming state responsibilities and inability to rise above their sophomoric ways.
The Brotherhood has, from the very onset, targeted the UAE in an attempt to spread a political ideology that has not ceased to expand in the power and authority vacuum that the Brotherhood has instilled within certain institutions, and more important, inside Egyptian society as a whole.
Brotherhood members have managed to transform Egypt from a cohesive and harmonious society into one that stands on the verge of breaking apart for the first time in history. No doubt the UAE's resources and position held great and pivotal meaning to the Brotherhood, its subsidiaries and branches, which all stood delusional, at the ready to pounce on the slightest opportunity to take advantage of a sociopolitical conflagration [in the UAE] driven by Arab Spring aspirations.
The UAE has played an important role in thwarting the Brotherhood's expansionary project into Arab societies. It has done so through its defense of its distinctive social and political structure, which Brotherhood members wagered on transforming into their bridgehead on the Arabian Peninsula. Most detrimental to the Brotherhood's agenda was the fact that it had been unmasked; for its existence was never publicly acknowledged, nor was it defined, the preference being for it to remain in the shadows and exploit any potential power vacuums that might arise.
The UAE's detection and detailed exposure of the Brotherhood's plans occurred during the latter's rise to power in Egypt and served to further frustrate Brotherhood members, who thought that their ascent in Egypt would signal other like-minded organizations to follow suit elsewhere.
But the exact opposite occurred. Emirati disclosure served as an early warning about the Brotherhood's true nature and its impending failure. A warning - the repercussions of which the Brotherhood never was able to absorb - leading to its reputation and support waning throughout the Arab world. This was in tandem with the prevalent mood in the UAE, not only on an official level, but also among the elites and society as a whole.
When societies are like ours - impregnable to infiltration, expansionary aspirations and targeted Brotherhood acquisitiveness - they are shamelessly insulted and accused of being prone to "slavery." That was the gist of Essam el-Erian's crude attack on Emiratis as a people this time around. But Erian failed to realize that his attacks only exposed the Brotherhood's true face and were not in the least insulting to us. Slavery is unfathomable for a people who are free and know how to remain free of Persian influence or the influence of any other factions.
Brotherhood members, who are the masters of two-facedness and have promoted and spread their political, social and moral culture to Arab societies, deny that Erian's base attack on Emiratis reflected their views. Yet their actions say otherwise: They only shyly rejected his words, just as they did when all Egyptians and political factions denounced Erian's call for Jews to return to Egypt and receive compensation for the injustices that they had suffered, as Erian put it. Erian is just a mouthpiece for the Brotherhood.
He benefits from immunity because he represents its link to outside forces, whose virtues he extolled in his attack on the UAE, thereby confirming the Brotherhood's repugnant bias in the whole affair.
Erian's statement only confirmed the Brotherhood's penchant for setting the Arab house on fire and the Brotherhood's fierce animosity toward others, which it covers with deception veiled in denial and recanting.
Erian, then, mirrors the moral and psychological state of mind that Brotherhood members find themselves in, a sense of being besieged by a popular rejection engendered by their abject failures - failures that the UAE itself may have contributed to.
Read more:
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2013/06/united-arab-emirates-erian-
egypt-divide.html?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7588#ixzz2Ws0v4a
RR
==========================================
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with "Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment