Why Some Egyptians Believe Islamists Killed Giulio Regeni

In a recent speech, Sisi finally confessed that taking down the Russian plane was a breech in Egyptian security and an act perpetrated by extremists. In the same breath he alluded to the murder of Giulio Regeni as a similar act, hence fortifying whatever predisposition loyal Egyptians had that he was killed by Islamists to frame the Egyptian regime.

The first murder of a Morsi supporter following the July 3 military takeover was caught on tape outside the Republican Guard headquarters on 5 July when the army shot and killed three pro Morsi protesters. I did not want to believe we had so quickly descended into the same violence and brutality we had fought so vehemently against under Mubarak, SCAF and Mohamed Morsi. That first kill meant a complete return to SCAF days where the military was rampant, vicious and as always, unaccountable. In utter disbelief and in the hopes of averting reality, I rushed to examine the evidence, I saw a few videos showing the shooting, from different angles, along with photos of the poor man's head which had been shot.

No sooner had the young man been shot and media circulated social media, conspiracy theories started to appear to salvage the narrative that things have not descended into the same old crimes and impunity. I remember being dragged into these theories in the remote hopes that they would pan out and we would not have to once again confront the military's crimes. Please let it be something else, please let it be something else I thought to myself.

Duly like an apologist, I began to examine the pictures, the videos and the testimonies. I looked at theories that postulated that it they were Muslim Brotherhood supporters who shot themselves in order to frame the military. It seems so silly now, but I had to treat it seriously, maybe it would offer salvation. The evidence pointed to a black car in the background passing at the exact same moment he was shot. There were also photos of his head with a small wound entering, and the back of the head blown off, indicating, by those theorists, that he had been shot from the back.

I entertained all these ideas and posted them and got into discussions. I may have even ignored Jeremy Bowen's testimony regarding that incident which he witnessed in order to give these conspiracies the benefit of the doubt. While some people responded to me by saying, “How could you?”others were very objective and dispelled all these lunacies. Exit wounds were larger than entry wounds, both angles show that the soldier shot him, there was no evidence that the black car fired any shots and more than that, the military was armed, accustomed to killing and it made no sense for protesters to kill their own instead of military personnel.

From that day onwards I toyed around with theories to explore them but was never able to dedicate that much attention or give them credence as much as I did the first time. The rest of the kills were about sometimes entertaining ideas of how justified they could have been, but never buying into it.

The Rabaa massacre was the price paid by Egyptians who entertained conspiracy theories and found justifications for the regime as they continued to kill innocent people with impunity. Many are not even aware of how monumental that price is till today and continue to argue there was no other way.

Five years into the revolution, a wider base of opposition was created thanks to the uprising in 2011, but that sheer number lead to more brutality against the growing number of dissidents. Crimes against humanity are as widespread as never before, forced disappearances, torture,.. With every escalating brutality comes its own set of conspiracies and justifications. The simple harsh reality of brutal criminal security forces in itself too brutal to handle in the minds of many.

This brings us to the brutal killing of Italian student Giulio Regeni who was kidnapped on January 25 and tortured to death with cigarette burns, stab wounds, broken ribs and signs of electrocution all over his body. The act is seemingly unprecedented, although a Frenchman was killed by the police in September 2013. Yet the disappearance the brutality and the manner with which it happened has only been customary with Egyptians, never with a foreigner.

The fact that it is seemingly unprecedented was enough for many who cannot deal with this as an escalation in brutality as another conspiracy theory. It must have been the Islamists that kidnapped young Giulio, tortured him exactly like the Egyptian police and dumped his body to implicate the police, who would, sure, do this to an Egyptian, but never in a hundred years would they do this to a foreigner. That is the rhetoric and the main reasoning, despite the army killing eight Mexican tourists, which they would claim is different because it was an accident.

It wasn't the media campaign and pressure from the Italian government that caused authorities to dump the body, no it was a perfectly timed plan by Islamists. To feed into this convenient conspiracy theory, a security affiliated newspaper, Youm 7, purposefully mistranslated security forces to Muslim Brotherhood from an Italian paper that postulated that Regeni could have been killed by a rival security agency to undermine Sisi. In another strange twist, another Italian paper reported on the mistranslated Youm 7 article that claimed it was the Muslim Brotherhood who killed Regeni. To make matters worse, an Italian paper noted that eyewitnesses in the NY Times piece who described how Giulio Regeni was taken by plain clothed policemen were not consistent in terms of timing with what they had found on Giulio Regeni's messages which indicated he was able to text 2 hours after the alleged arrest by authorities.

This to them seems like a golden opportunity to discount not just the eyewitnesses but the three security sources cited in the NYT piece indicating that Giulio was in police custody before his death.

The most enlightened of them would say that we still do not know what has happened and that investigations are underway, so we should not point fingers, and yet in the same moment, the mere mention of the Muslim Brotherhood in an Italian piece, has caused some on occasion to jump to the conclusion that investigators suspect the Muslim Brotherhood. Having examined the said paragraph it only commented that trade unions were monitored by the regime and garnered the interest of the Muslim Brotherhood who sought to create unrest. That unrest was all too quickly concluded by the apologists to be the murder of Giulio Regeni.

There are many benefits and motivations of having Islamists kill Regeni instead of the regime. It would confirm the bias that Islamists are an absolute evil, it would offer hope that while Egyptian police do this to Egyptians, there is still hope they are responsible enough not to do this to foreigners. But in reality, many also understand that the police would never own up if they had done this and the international implications if they did would be huge, and would mean that this is indeed a criminal regime that is far too brutal and ugly to carry the country forward.

It is fear of confronting such a reality that drives some to believe that it isn't the police, although I'm very certain many know deep down inside, just like I did when I examined the first murder, that Egyptian security forces the most likely culprits of this heinous crime. It doesn't even matter that the Ministry of Interior sent out instructions in a periodic secret memo, shortly after Giulio's murder, not to take action against foreigners without informing state security and the ministry of interior.

Denial is an endless river in Egypt, and it is surprising what you can find if you're looking for it and how easy it is to ignore reality.  

The Significance of Shaimaa's Death

I’ve thought a lot about why the death of Shaimaa Al-Sabbagh has been more painful than many of the unjustified recent deaths we’ve encountered recently. It could be because she’s close to my circles, or because she looked pretty or because of the innocence of attempting to place a wreath of flowers in memory of the fallen martyrs or because the photos captured moments before she passed away were truly heart wrenching.

It may be all of that, but alongside, the more pressing reason is because her passing resembles the murder of Khaled Said, all over again. If we can capture the revolution as a single demand, it was so that we never have another Khaled Said. It doesn’t mean that people are never killed again, but that the regime does not get away with murder and does not use its institutions to cover up their crimes.

But there have been so many Khaled Said’s over the years, and we haven’t been able to stop them. The revolution has failed, utterly and categorically in fulfilling its epitomised demand. What’s worse is that, on the eve of January 25, the counter revolution delivers the strongest message possible, that it has triumphed and will kill any Khaled Said in whatever shape or form he is re-incarnated, that it will continue to get away with it and that it will continue to target us.

The defeat is doubly painful as people cheer on criminals in uniform making up excuses for them. In their defence of the uniform, people have resorted to all sorts of explanations catered by propaganda that helps sedate the conscience. State sponsored explanations range from, let’s wait and see to find out what happened to the more extreme support of her death because she chose the wrong time to protest without a permit.

In between, an endless middle ground of diverting attention, accusing the Muslim Brotherhood or her friends of killing her and casting doubt on the testimonies of those who saw it happen. Now isn’t the time to discredit the police because they protect you, they say. They say it as the police itself shoots at and eventually kills an unarmed woman.

This is business as usual for the police and authorities, along with the usual forensic, judiciary and media cover ups for what has happened in clear daylight. We are asked to shut up about the whole matter because the judiciary is charged with investigations, but when has the public prosecutor ever arrived at real conclusion or true condemnation for regime crimes?

If anything, prosecution and the judiciary in Egypt have systematically attempted to disprove what we’ve seen with our own eyes. Witnesses are pressured, videos disappear, the Ministry of Interior logs disappear, and there is every attempt at hiding what we have all seen. Yet they dare call it justice.

If I were reading this about a different country, I would have written it off as a hyperbole, a gross generalisation, the ramblings of an angry citizen with poor analytical skills. But the true tragedy is that time and time again, events have proven these words to be true, unexaggerated and perhaps even understatements which don’t reflect current reality strongly enough.

Strangely enough this incident not only resembles the Khaled Said crime but combines that of the woman in Tahrir in December 2011 who was part-stripped by the military during the Cabinet Clashes. Like the unknown battered woman, Shaimaa was smeared by questioning her motives of being out on the streets. Doubts as to the actual perpetrators were raised and lies about who killed her were unjustifiably spread.

It was this event of targeting a woman so shamelessly in December 2011 that mobilised a nationwide campaign by the name of Kazeboon that dared to call out the regime on its lies. Likewise women who identify with Shaimaa have decided to defy fear and stand this Thursday in the same spot she fell despite the risks of being unjustly targeted like Shaimaa. The fate of this protest is unknown at the time of writing.

There is a constant attempt to shift the debate to everything other than the murderer of Shaimaa.  Not only did security forces shoot Shaimaa until she dropped to the ground, they continued shooting at the gathering that was already dispersing even after she was hit, refused to get her medical attention and arrested those trying to help her. This determination on treating our lives as cheap and the audacity of covering up this crime is a blow to Egyptians willing to confront the truth of their perceived worth.

The real monstrosity surrounding Shaimaa’s death is the unwillingness of society as a whole to bring its perpetrators to justice. The people seem to have been desensitised to injustices. They only see legitimate grievances when affecting state institutions or perpetrated by opposition to the state.

The revolution’s promises seem now like a mirage rather than an oasis. Those who dared to stand up to oppressive forces in pursuit of their dreams have done so with very little on their side and continually pay a heavy price. They have been targeted, crushed, drained and killed just like Shaimaa, with few to mourn, and even those few are smeared.

Those who dreamt of change have constantly tried to use truth as their primary weapon. The truth is that Shaimaa Al-Sabbagh was killed and left to die by the Egyptian police. She was shot at close range possibly because she refused to run and be intimidated as security forces charged the gathering. But even when truth is on your side, sometimes it’s just not enough.

First published in DNE on January 28, 2015

Staring into Darkness: A Chance Encounter with State Security

A chance encounter got me to look into the faces of state security officers and informants as they were stalking one of the activists. I’m not at liberty to describe what brought this about, but I can certainly remember their behaviour and I remember their faces. With that look, as we both stared at one another, I got a glimpse of what state security is really like.

The one I looked at seemed to be a young officer in charge of the case. He was dressed casually, but in his face there was a look of death. There was darkness underneath his eyes and a look of defiance to the entire world. If he had not been a state security officer, that same look would have been in hardened criminal, familiar with the underworld and excelling at it by mercilessly eradicating his opponents. That was the look on his face, as though humanity and mercy had been robbed of him. It was as if his soul had already been condemned to the darkness of hell, if there really was a soul in there. There was no redemption in that face. 

I came to think about whether I was making this up in my head or if it was true. I have a thing for reading people’s faces though, they tell me so much about them, and my sense of what they tell is seldom every wrong. Still there’s no way to find out whether all of this was true, and so I figured I’d reason through it.

As a state security officer, I can imagine the kind of life he may have had. When he was young he was probably impoverished, picked on for his poverty and in his attempt to escape such judgement, he must have taken the only possible route that would earn him some respect, a path of servitude to the powerful so that he can be powerful and respected for his position rather than his money. Such a path must have lead him to blind servitude to powerful men and in exchange for respect from others, he accepted to serve those with power. What was new about this? He was always looked down upon anyway. One of these days he’d grow powerful and show all these little people that he was better than them. One of these days he’d show them that it was only their money that earned them respect. But he, he is a survivor who has gone through darkness and ended up triumphant.

He had to serve a series of powerful people in the police, and in gratitude to his obedience, they made him one of them, with the power to get away with anything they chose. He could break the law, but not only that, he would be doing it in the name of serving his country, personified in his power masters. What more could he want, the dark underworld he was accustomed to, but with a position of ruling over it. No one would question anything he does and he can always justify any crime he chose to do through patriotism. This was a strong network of the most powerful people in the country, they can force any judge to acquit him, any government body to succumb to his will. They did that for one another, and in return demanded loyalty, whether they’re right or wrong.

They were charged with the security of the state, but they themselves  were the state, and they were charged, using the most vile means available to safeguard themselves. Those police officers from lowly origins need to be seen as masters, and so they act like it. They are charged with the politics of the country, they knew best.

This officer finds that he was given the chance to do anything he wants, with no one to answer to but his corrupt masters. He can torture, he can kill, he can interrogate and he can sexually abuse any woman or man. He’s seen it all and done it all and no one could ever bring him to account. All the humanity inside him has been killed. He feels like a god on the streets. Who could ever question him or bring him to account if he chooses to commit a crime in the name of the state? If two ordinary policeman can beat a young man to death in plain view and get away with it, is it not easier for a state security officer to do the same?

For a time, people have rejected these sinister practices, understanding fully well that this group of people never cared for national security, never cared for the state. They only cared to preserve the current order of power. But now, people have given them a license to be gods once again, they can pillage and plunder, they can torture and kill, they can harass and intimidate and no one would bring them into account. No one can claim that what they do is a crime, there is an assumption they’re working for a greater good. They themselves feel their crimes can be justified through nationalism and elitism. 

And so as I look at him, he looks back at me with complete disdain and arrogance. Looking at him is like staring into the abyss. There’s no one to turn to, it’s just you and the beasts. No police can help you, no judiciary, no army personnel, no politician, no foreign power and even the people you trusted for solidarity have forsaken you. You’re staring darkness in the eye. 

But as I look into this darkness, I remember one thing. That I’m not as filthy, not as criminal, not as corrupt. I’m not as soulless as the person I’m staring into. Perhaps that doesn’t mean much to him, but it means the world to me.

A False Sense of Security: The Egyptian Military’s Lost Bet on the Police

Recently the regime, personified in the entity of the police, lead an attack on Egypt’s activists who opposed the protest law and the military trials of civilians. The attack on 26 November 2013  was brutal, vindictive and lacked professionalism. The police violently assaulted protesters in a manner that violated the law they were implementing and furthermore targeted women through beatings and physical assaults during arrests and while in custody.

The attack on these activists who are greatly related to the January 25 revolution can be simplistically described as an attack on revolutionaries. The attack on a legitimacy already gained by revolutionaries is a move that may cost the regime much if not corrected. At the end of the day, the legitimacy of a regime is determined by its perceived integrity, even when taking extraordinary or unlawful measures. This may explain why unlawful attacks on the Muslim Brotherhood were widely supported and did not negatively impact the regime’s popularity at least among the wider section of the public opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood.

However, the recent attacks on the revolutionary class may prove problematic to the regime. Despite numerous efforts,  accusations against the revolutionary activists were never solidified. As a matter of fact, the regime reversed its positions several times with regards to past events. Most recently, they acknowledged the Mohamed Mahmoud protesters as martyrs who died for a legitimate cause, even though the killings were performed by the police and supported by the army in November of 2011.

The acknowledgement took the form of a press statement by the police and a cheap monument erected in the middle of Tahrir square on 18 November, the anniversary of the events. They  may have thought that such a shallow gesture would be enough to placate the revolutionary class that had restrained its opposition to the regime for some time. The gesture failed to bring about desired results, mainly because there was more at stake for the revolutionary class than a memorial. The activists remain searching for accountability and real change in style of governance which never really took form.

The recent retaliation can perhaps be explained as frustration from the current regime because of failure to placate the revolutionary class. The attempt ended in a huge political triumph for the revolutionaries on 18 November 2013. This is perhaps why the police reverted to what they are accustomed to, attempting to provide a security solutions to what is essentially a political and social problem. Police have reverted to Mubarak era practices in order to bring about stability. The current regime spearheaded by the military is perhaps counting on its current popularity in the hopes that police may find a solution to the constant instability in the country.

It is my assessment that such measures will not work. The economic situation is far too dire and the alliances formed by the current regime representatives are too fragile for such oppressive measures. The regime is counting on a false sense of strength derived from their controlled media, security apparatus, judiciary system, army supporters and MB haters. Despite military fervor, the tide can still turn against them.

While at first glance, such institutions and tools seem to translate into formidable power, the government cannot continue to exert its hegemony over society without the consent of the numerous factions of society such as workers, students, activists, lawyers, and so forth. That is where the failure will come about – unless the regime can quickly undo the damage. This remains unlikely to happen considering how incompetent Egypt’s political class proved to be. The military, however, seems to have become more sensitive to public sentiments. There is a chance they may understand the potential shift in society that will be caused by the retaliation of revolutionary activists.

Despite the confrontational nature of these activists and their mistrust of the generals who they believe are ruling the country behind the scenes, the military’s worst enemy is its own police force charged with the country’s internal security. It is the corruption and incompetence of this police that will more likely eat away at whatever legitimacy the current regime has drawn from mass protests (which they now want to hamper).

At the end of the day, the military may soon realize that they  have no possible path for stability and consensus except through reforming the police, which they, not the activists, will need to do.  With such an obvious conclusion, the question remains whether the military itself is free enough of corruption to take such measures, and whether its own network of interests and false sense of security will burn the political class it is trying to build.

Originally published on Counterpunch.

In Memory of Mohamed Mahmoud: Nothing Left to Do but Look

Photo: Mos'ab ElShami

Even I cannot comprehend it; these ordinary people, extraordinary in their bravery, fighting off the gruesome beasts of an ugly regime that refuses to die. Two years ago, these ordinary people, these protesters took to a street off of Tahrir Square, facing security forces for four days in some of the most brutal clashes the country had witnessed since the eighteen day uprising. Some of the biggest questions about the Mohamed Mahmoud clashes persist to this day. What was the point? What did they aim to achieve? 

These don’t seem to be the important questions to ask. The clashes were a result of the courage of revolutionaries who confronted a regime adamant on playing dumb. The revolutionaries never took aim.They simply fired and the result was a tragic triumph, perhaps as all great triumphs are.

It’s not accidental that, on November 19, 2011, the police, the epitome of the tyrannical state, aimed at unarmed protesters’ eyes. The regime was unable to hide behind its lies. Those in Mohamed Mahmoud were there to send a message: we see you, we can see past your lies. Unable to hide, the regime chose instead to blind those looking on. That’s why the streets of Mohamed Mahmoud were filled with blinding teargas, and yet the response from the people was brave and resilient, refusing to retreat. 

Instead of backing down and retreating to the relative safety of Tahrir, protesters, armed with little more than their integrity and handfuls of rocks made their choice. They chose to open their chests to bullets, were open to death, fighting for a great many who were already blind or too scared to fight for their right to keep seeing, to keep looking. 

The best of us died in November 2011 and little by little, all that’s left of us now are the worst. That’s what happened to the revolution; the worst of us survived and now we’re unable to do what the many brave protesters in Mohamed Mahmoud did two years ago: choosing to see. Now the worst of us play politics, make tactical calculations and gang up on the few remaining revolutionary spirits.

One year passed after the clashes in Mohamed Mahmoud, and the few brave ones that survived returned to the same place, and in continuing to tell the regime they can still see,  they faced a similar fate.Gaber Salah, better known simply as Jika was gunned down. He was 17. 

Jika’s funeral was the largest I have been to since the start of the revolution. In a silent procession towards the graves, people marched as though mourning the death of the last of us. On the way back, once again they defiantly chanted against his killers.

In truth we’re not as strong as those who died. We’re the remnants, we’re the ones who stayed behind, and that’s why the revolution is faltering, because they’ve taken the best of us. As weak as we are, we need to at least hold on to the values of the brave people who died. We need to hold on even if we can’t fight for them as hard as they did, that’s the absolute minimum we can do.

How many masked strangers have thrown back tear gas canisters under heavy fire? How many of them have fended off thuggish attacks? How many have taken a bullet for you? 

This is not an attempt to romanticize Mohamed Mahmoud protesters as individuals, they are who they are, ordinary people with all their flaws, but extraordinary in their choices and sacrifices. On the streets of Mohamed Mahmoud, I saw who I like to call Jika’s friends, the little hope remaining in our revolution. They’ve been let down by everybody, by the Mubrak regime into which they were born. They have even been let down by the older generation who chose to confront Mubarak. They’ve been let down by the so-called revolutionaries because a great many of them don’t realize that Jika, and those like him, are the real revolution; they are its hope. They have played politics or spend their time on social media, promoting an unfinished revolution rather than going out to finish it. 

What you see should change you, and I have changed. I know who I’d rather be loyal to. I’d rather be loyal to the fallen and their ideas. I’m one of the weak ones that survived, I cannot fight as bravely as they have, but I do know this, with whatever little strength I have, I will continue to fight, even if it’s a fight I’m destined to lose, for a country that has given  its children so many funerals.

We have nothing left to do but try our best in all our weakness to do what the lions of Mohamed Mahmoud were doing: keep looking. We should not swallow the lies that ask us to look the other way, nor accept the myth that now is not the time to speak the truth. We should never accept the joke that maybe things have changed without anything really changing. We have nothing left to do but look, even if they once again, take aim for our eyes. 

First published on Atlantic Council's Egypt Source blog.

Photo: Mos'ab El Shami

The Revenge of the Police State

Originally published in Jadaliyya on 17 Aug 2013

[14 August 2013, security officer firing tear gas on protesters as they attempt to escape the attacks by the security apparatus. Image originally posted to Flicker by tarek1991]

While the ongoing violence in Egypt has contributed to a state of confusion and polarization, one thing is certain: The biggest threat facing Egypt remains the return of the police state. More specifically, the threat concerns, not only the reconstitution of a police state, which never really left since Hosni Mubarak’s ouster, but also the return of the implicit, if not overt, acceptance of the repressive practices of the coercive apparatus. In this respect, the current face-off between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood holds very damaging potential. Widespread anti- Muslim Brotherhood sentiment is currently providing the state with legitimacy to use of force against the Brotherhood, and, in the future, a potential cover for using similar tactics against other dissidents as well.

There is a problem with the way security forces have violently dispersed the pro-Mohamed Morsi sit-ins, even with claims that both Nahda and Rabea sit-ins were armed. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with the Muslim Brotherhood or with the objectives of the sit-ins, the murdering of over five hundred people goes against any sense of human decency and morality. The armed protesters’ reported use of unarmed individuals as human shields is equally despicable and reprehensible. Beyond the serious moral considerations at hand, other problems persist.

The forced dispersal of Rabaa and Nahda marks a triumph of security solutions over political ones—a trend that characterized much of the Mubarak era. Security solutions rarely solve a problem without the support of a political course of action, which seems to be missing in our current context. There is no question that the Muslim Brotherhood leaders have a long history of poor negotiating behavior, showing extreme stubbornness, and failing to uphold their end of the bargain on many occasions, in power and in opposition. But this is exactly why dealing with them demands a politically savvy approach, instead of reliance on security solutions, which will only reinforce the Brotherhood’s rigidity, not to mention the heavy human costs associated with such measures.

Instead, the military and its sponsored government chose a confrontational, security path. This path will only further empower the coercive apparatus without guaranteeing any results, in terms of political stability and social peace. As extremist groups are pushed into hiding, the security leaders will find excuses to employ intrusive surveillance measures, interrogate, torture, and abuse, all with zero transparency and accountability. Supporters of the crackdown among those who oppose the Brotherhood will gladly accept. Reinforcing this trend is the fact that the crackdown has apparently empowered radicalized elements among the supporters of the deposed president.

Some may say that the increasing influence of the security sector will only be limited to “counter-terrorism” and extremist Islamist groups that espouse violence. There are clear signs that this would not be the case. For example, immediately prior to the crackdown against the Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins, retired generals took control of governerships in an overwhelming majority of provinces. For many, this was a clear signal that the state has opted to “securitize” governance, and political files.

Additionally, those who believe that security sector will not overstep its boundaries clearly overlook the long history of the Egyptian state’s meddling in political and private affairs in the name of counter-terrorism and national security. Given that rich history, we could safely conclude that today domestic intelligence agencies are quickly gaining a blank check to meddle in our affairs for the sake of national security. Soon Egyptians will be asked to support their government in whatever decisions it takes on the grounds that the government is at the frontlines of the fight against “violent Islamists.” Political dissidents of all orientations will be vulnerable to the accusation of being soft on “terrorism” or supportive of “radical Islamists.” Will anyone care in the confusing state of insecurity?

Egypt, in other words, is on a dangerous path. There are many reasons to believe that police forces will employ their brutal practices at Mubarak era rates. The policing establishment itself has not changed in any way, never reformed, and never held to account for its past crimes. Minister of Interior Mohamed Ibrahim has even signaled that such a return is imminent, pledging, “Security will be restored to this nation as if it was before January 25, and more."

Tacit supporters of the security state will respond that there was no other way, that there was no room for negotiating with the Brotherhood, and that the forcible dispersal of the sit-ins was necessary.

Such a response, however, overlooks the major limitations of the security solution to the underlying problem, namely that calling on the police—unreformed and lacking the proper training—to resolve the standoff between the Brotherhood and the government is like asking a butcher to do a heart surgeon’s job. Additionally, one could counter and ask: Was it necessary for the police to target unarmed civilians carrying cameras? Was it necessary for security forces to shoot at unarmed crowds? Was it necessary for the police to leave unprotected all the churches that suffered attacks in the aftermath of the sit-ins’ dispersal?

But setting aside analyses of what the police could have done differently, it remains that the recent violence has only deepened people’s reliance on the security state and will exempt politicians from devising solutions to political differences. With the increase in social conflict, particularly along sectarian lines, security services will once again regain their traditional role as an arbiter of these conflicts, as well as their license to employ abusive, repressive tactics. This sustained sense of insecurity will only steer Egypt away from real justice. With the empowerment of the security sector, there will be no reason or motivation to push for revolutionary demands for real reforms inside the policing establishment. It is also likely that the escalation in violence and the pro-security rhetoric that the state has been touting will make it difficult for political dissidents, who are equally opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood and the military, to employ street action.

In some ways, the MB’s confrontational approach, wittingly or not, is handing back the coercive apparatus its license to kill and repress with impunity, but so are all those who are cheering on the security forces’ crackdown against the Brotherhood. Many such voices have criticized Mohamed ElBaradie for resigning his post as vice president in the wake of the recent violence. But in reality there is no role for a politician in a state that is poised to pick a security solution in dealing with every pressing challenge.

As we confront the question of whether or not Egypt will witness the “return” of the police of the Mubarak era, a number of critical questions arise, such as: Is there any revolutionary fervor left to resist this route? Or have revolutionary commitments been drained through all the blood and the failed attempts at establishing a democratic political order?

Whether or not a new wave of revolutionary mobilization will emerge to push back against the growing power of the security state is an open question. But it is clear that the persistence of the confrontation between the state and the Muslim Brotherhood will only deepen the securitization of politics by reinforcing demands for security solutions. What it will take to reverse the return of the police state, which revolutionary activists have worked hard to resist, is uncertain. One could argue that the brutal injustices that the police are bent on committing will always make resistance structurally inevitable. But that suggests that reviving resistance will come at a high price, one that Khalid Said, Jika, Mohamed al-Guindy, and many others have paid.

Challenges to Finding Your Moral Compass

The past few years have been trying from a moral point of view. I find myself having to make moral choices every day about new and strange situations that are not out of a book but before my eyes. It hasn’t only been trying, but also tiring. Every time I need to make up my mind about something I must go through piles of data and try to discover what of it can be treated as real information. Who can I trust? What can I read out of the truth? What can I read out of the lies?

There’s too much to read, too much to look through, too many lies to sift through. In the end facts are not enough. They have to be put together through reason. Reject the impossible, entertain the possible, verify what you can through circles of trust, figure out if they’ve been lied to. Then you have to look through your moral lens and make up your mind and on occasion adjust that lens.

How does one react morally to events around? Over 500 people were killed. The police only claimed 10 machine guns were found. How can this number justify the number of deaths? On the other hand over 40 policemen were killed which makes this a combat not a massacre. At the top level it’s easy. The MB leaders take the most blame for bringing us to this point, whoever is running the state whether military or state security next for ordering the dispersal and police for utter brutality. But that’s not enough, the intricacies are puzzling.

MB leaders have called upon their followers and put them in harm’s way but are their supporters without agency? What kind of parent takes their child to a protest that will be dispersed imminently? What kind of protester continues in an armed protest to act as a human shield? What kind of protester picks up arms to fight using other unarmed protesters as human shields? Those human shields do not shield off anything, both sides want them dead. The MB to raise the death tally to further entrench their position as martyrs after their autocratic rule, the state and security forces with the blessing of the spectators, the Egyptian people.

What moral ground permits supporters of the sit-in to attack churches across Egypt in retaliation to their forced dispersal? 

The entire chain is immoral; followers dying for remote and distanced leaders, Copts dying for remote and isolated followers. It makes no sense. How many lives were lost by this utter irresponsibility and lies?

Some mad men lead the country into a vicious cycle of madness. How does Beltagy feel about his daughter dying? Is it for a just cause? The life of a beautiful young woman cut short with no chance to live out her future and see what she can become. Was it worth it?

Was it really worth it, this thirst for power that only brought about injustice? How about all the lives destroyed of the Brotherhood followers or innocent Copts whose livelihood was targeted. What was it all for?

And how about those officers, tools of the state, some fighting for duty, others killing indiscriminately. What were they thinking when they ended all those lives. That they were worth nothing? What were they thinking when they allowed Copts to be attacked and their churches burned? That they deserve this?

Do they deserve to die? Do they deserve to kill?

But how about everyone else, whose life was destroyed by the MB? All they want is to live without an oppressor, who not only wants to steal their present but also their future and their children’s future. They want an army to protect them from MB, an army to kill them all. Do they realize that this army will take away what’s left after the battle is done?

There are many questions to balance out together, much more think of a way out. My loyalty is to my values, not to any group, secular or not, liberal or not. But with all the tiredness I feel on a personal level trying to figure things out, and how tiring and trying my journey is, I feel pleasantly surprised when I see a few, not too many, not too little, reaching similar points, trying to answer questions seriously, trying to find out the truth earnestly. I don’t know how troubling their journey is to them, is it as arduous as mine? I hope not, because my journey is driving me into exhaustion. Yet it’s finding others who arrive to the same point that gives me hope to go on and assures me that it’s worth the trouble. 

Police Brutality Under Morsi

This is a strong drive from the police and once again they engage in brutality. I was present at the time on Sheikh Rihan, perpendicular to Kasr Al Ainy where the main attack took place. They fired a few tear gas canisters down that road in the direction of the church where a makeshift hospital has been set up.

The problem is that brutality has been so ingrained within police mentality and there is nothing being done to address this. We do not know why police charged. They persist to be brutal and that is the manner in which  Morsi wants them to remain. More and more evidence that the replacement of the general prosecutor was not reform but a move to help eliminate enemies of the state, Morsi's state or to be more accurate, the Muslim Brotherhood.

Attacks continue outside Omar Makram Mosque

Notice how one of theirs is in civilian clothes and has a gun

Egypt Independent reports on photo journalist being brutalized by police.