Marc Lynch, a/k/a “Abu Ardvark,” reported today via his twitter feed that al-Qaradawi stated that each Egyptian citizen must choose for himself whether to vote yes or no, implicitly rejecting the position of some who have claimed that it is a religious obligation to vote yes.  I was happy to hear this because it is consistent with Qaradawi’s previous teachings on voting, which he classifies as a special kind of shahada, namely, testimony pertaining to the public interest.  A witness has a legal duty to tell the truth in a court case, not provide testimony that will further his or her own interest.  So too, according to Qaradawi, a Muslim voter, when voting, is being asked for his considered opinion on what constitutes the public good, and the voter is therefore under a religious duty to provide that considered opinion honestly and in good faith.  Because what constitutes the actual public interest is something that can only be known prospectively, a voter’s decision can only be based on judgment, ijtihad, under conditions of uncertainty, and accordingly, all that is required is a good-faith belief on the part of the voter that his decision is the correct one.  Note, however, that what this view of voting prohibits is self-interested voting, i.e., voting based on how it will benefit the voter as an individual rather than as a member of the citizenry.  In this respect, Qaradawi’s model of voting is similar to civic republicanism and rejects voting as a self-interested enterprise whose purpose is to maximize individual welfare.  For those with more of an interest on his theory of the ethics of voting, I believe he has a discussion of this in his book “Fiqh al-Dawla fi al-Shari’a al-Islamiyya,” published by Dar al-Shuruq.

Al-Masry al-Youm reported yesterday that Al-Azhar was paying substantial sums of money to 60 generals in state security, with payments being fully documented on al-Azhar’s books.  This seems to be a clear case of money-laundering for the benefit of state security: why would al-Azhar undertake such a policy on its own?  This leads to the likelihood that other governmental agencies were used in a similar manner to transfer resources to the security apparatus and other regime insiders.

OnIslam Arabic reported yesterday that the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Dar reported that Gulf countries have told the Egyptian Military Supreme Council that it must prevent Egyptian courts from holding Mubarak accountable for his crimes, and that if they fail to do so, they will retaliate by, among other things, expelling Egyptian workers and withdrawing Gulf investments from Egypt.  The plausibility of such reports should not be dismissed outright.  A democratic revolution in Egypt that holds corrupt politicians, including Mubarak, accountable to the law, is precisely the last thing that rulers of the Gulf wish to see.  Unlike Iran, they cannot vilify Egypt on sectarian grounds.  Accordingly, they reasonably perceive the success of the Egyptian Revolution as a direct threat to their own regimes, perhaps even more threatening than the Iranian Revolution of 1979 or Abd al-Nasir’s regime in the 60s.  Nevertheless, it would be a great mistake for Egyptians to heed such threats.  There are alternative sources of capital in the world, and a democratic Egypt would recognize that the talents of its people are its greatest resource.  Some of the most talented Egyptians are in the Gulf, and their return could have a positive impact on Egypt’s development provided the right economic reforms are made.  With a democratic government, the chances of implementing such reforms are greater than they have ever been in the past.  Finally, and if the worst case scenario took place, the Egyptian government is not helpless: it could freeze their assets in Egypt until such time as they came to their senses.

Many friends and relatives have asked me whether, in my opinion, Egyptians should or should not approve the proposed constitutional amendments in the fast-approaching March 19^th Referendum.  I have consistently refused, however, to express an opinion because, unlike most of the views that I have expressed thus far on the progress of the Revolution, I don’t see this referendum as representing a decisive turning point. Accordingly, it does not raise, in my mind at least, a clear issue of principle.  Moreover, my analytic response to this question (unconvinced that there is a need to adopt an entirely new constitution to replace the 1971 Constitution) is at odds with the strategy I have used since January 25, namely, to defer to the leaders of the January 25^th Revolution.

British Muslims are experiencing yet another challenge to the integrity of their religious life.  This time, the threat emerges not from hysterical right-wing Islamophobes, but their virtual allies within the Muslim community who seem too-eager to act according to the Islamophobes’ stereotyped script of what a Muslim is.  The controversy surrounds comments made by a certain British Imam, or religious leader, Usama Hasan, regarding the compatibility of the theory of evolution with Quranic teachings regarding God’s creation of the world and human beings.

While responsible British Muslims have been quick to denounce these dangerous demagogues, I pause to note that some arguments condemning this kind of behavior are better not being said at all.  One British Imam, for example, in the context of explaining why he rejects these threats, pointed out that issues of heresy, and punishment for heresy, are a matter that is within the exclusive competence of a legitimate Islamic political authority, and since such an authority does not exist in Britain, calls for the death of Hasan on account of his heresy are simply incitement for murder.

The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it sidesteps the central issue: does Islam permit Muslims in good faith to raise the kinds of theological questions that Usama Hasan attempted to discuss, or are Muslims simply required to adhere to a theology that consists only of literalist adherence to scripture?  We know that Islamic theology, historically speaking, has not been so limited, but has always systematically attempted to reconcile the apparent meanings of revelation with other sources of knowledge — whether rational or empirical.  As a result, Muslim theology generally took the position that it was permissible, indeed, obligatory, to treat certain passages in revelation as metaphorical when their literal meaning contradicted rational truths.

Indeed, according to all Muslim theologians, it is impermissible to defer to the opinion of another in matters of creed (usul al-din), and each person is obligated to understand creedal matters for himself.  Usama Hasan was simply discharging his individual duty when he engaged in an attempt to reconcile evolution with the plain sense of revelation.  Suppose his argument was silly: well, in that case, the proper Islamic response is not to denounce him as a heretic, but rather to expose the fallaciousness of his reasoning.  Instead of hiding behind procedural arguments as to why such threats are not permissible, we would be better off as a community if we reasserted the fundamental obligation Islam imposes upon us to understand, as individuals, the nature of God, our relationship to God, and God’s relationship to us.  Once we restore this obligation to our communities as one of its core values, then we will have taken a substantial step toward defeating those for whom Islam is simply a “take it or leave it” set of dogmas or rules that is incapable of tolerating any form of thought, much less dissent.

Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister, Daniel Ayalon, recently published a piece on foreignpolicy.com’s Middle East Channel lamenting the fact that Libya was able to secure a position on the UN’s Human Rights Council, and decried the fact that states gave political expedience greater priority than a genuine commitment to human rights.  I, too, look forward to a day when countries don’t use political or financial interests to subvert cooperation in advancing human rights, and welcome an Israel that could be a partner iin such a world.

But Minister Ayalon’s criticisms of the UN Human Rights Council can hardly be taken at face value.  Indeed, he is exploiting the scandalous behavior of Qaddafi, and the fact that Libya is a member of this council, to undermine the Goldstone Report and the Commission’s report on Israel’s attack on the Turkish vessel, Mavi Marmara.  Unfortunately for Ayalon, the politicization of membership in the Council is not, in itself, evidence that these particular reports are not credible: they were each prepared by independent and professional human rights experts.  Moreover, there is even a deeper flaw in Ayalon’s reasoning, which is essentially based on the fallacious argument that “Because my enemy is bad, I am good.”  Ayalon brags that Israel receives a score of “free” from Freedom House, but Freedom House does not take into account the status of Palestinians in reaching this conclusion.  Accordingly, it is of little moral relevance: I’m fairly certain that southern whites enjoyed robust democratic rights in the Jim Crow south, but it was a still a regime of racial subordination.  So too, Israel may very well be a democracy and therefore “free” for tis Jews, but it certainly does not qualify as free for even its Arab citizens, much less the Palestinians who are under its military rule.

I am also happy to hear Ayalon state that “The people of our region are speaking in great numbers about the need for freedom, transparency, and accountability.”  I hope that means Israel is about to launch on its revolution, an equality revolution, in which it dismantles its own structures of oppression, subordination, and separation. If that is the case, then I am happy to report that Ayalon is on board with the Arab Spring.  Let’s keep on hoping for spring in Israel.

Today, the acting prime minister of Egypt, Ahmad Shafiq, resigned, and was replaced by `Isam Sharaf.   The opposition’s successful insistence on the resignation of Shafiq indicates the depth and breadth of the revolution’s popular support and gives those of us who are hoping that the January 25th Revolution will result in a genuine democratic transformation an objective basis to believe that this goal will be achieved.  Why is it so significant that Shafiq resigned in the face of popular pressure? In the wake of Mubarak’s resignation, a debate has raged in Egypt between those who describe the events of Jan. 25 as a revolution whose goals were to transform the nature of the Egyptian state and its relationship to the Egyptian people, and those  who dismiss it as a revolt centered around succession, nothing more or less.  Events subsequent to Mubarak have removed all doubts surrounding this question.  The people want a revolution, not a change in succession.  Shafiq’s resignation is clear proof that the revolutionary program is ascendant at this moment in time, and the Supreme Military Council remains substantially constrained by the popular will.  Nor is it likely that there can be a return to the status quo ante.  Even before Shafiq resigned, the fact that he was forced to appear on Egyptian talk shows and defend his statements before a skeptical host and confrontational guests means that the age of Egyptian authoritarianism, and with it Arab authoritarianism, is gone.  At a minimum, Jan. 25th has put an end to that stage of Egyptian political development.  We now have good reason to hope for real democratic reform and accountability.

ForeignPolicy.com’s Middle East Channel published my latest thoughts on Egypt’s labor movement and its role in Egypt’s future democracy.  The essential argument is that if Egyptians want to establish a successful democracy, they must establish a social democracy along the lines of the Scandinavian countries.

I am posting this announcement from a new Facebook Group, “Egyptians Without Borders,” which is trying to organize emigre Egyptians all over the world to help Egypt during its transition from dictatorship to democracy.

To All Egyptians who immigrated to the US, Canada, Australia, and Europe over the last 30 years
To All Egyptians who moved to the Gulf looking for better work opportunities over those years.
Congratulations to all of you, Egypt is back.!!

“Egyptians-Without-Borders” is a not-for-profit organization just established to help build a
“Bridge of Support” from Egyptians abroad to their Homeland.
We are not collecting money. We are not asking for donations.
We just want You to help Egypt now in anyway you can: Financially, with your Expertise, and/or through your Contacts:

1.    Here is how you can help Egypt Financially:
1.      Consider going back and living in Egypt, if you could.
2.      Consider retiring in Egypt, if you reached retirement age.
3.      If you are a businessman, consider moving some of your business to Egypt.
4.      Invest in Egyptian assets, if you are an investor.
5.      Move your savings to Egypt. Egyptian Pound deposits get 10% return. The Central Bank guarantees all deposits. This will help the Egyptian economy and the Egyptian Pound
6.      Buy Egyptians Mutual Funds. This will help the Egyptian Stock Market recover from its recent severe losses due to Foreign investors sell off.
7.      Buy a property in Egypt. Now is the time to invest in Egyptian real estate.
8.      Visit Egypt now with your family and friends. Go to Sharm or Hurgada. Visit Luxur and Aswan. Take a Nile cruise. You must see Tahrir Square with your kids. This will help Egypt tourism sector.
9.      Fly Egypt Air, always. It is now a member of the Star Alliance. Egypt Air planes, staff, and Terminal 3 are all now world class.
10.  Buy made-in-Egypt cars, products, clothing, frozen food, etc
11.  Get all your Egyptian ID’s issued or renewed now..We must all get/renew the Green Passport, get/renew our National ID Card, get Birth Certificates for our kids..etc. The collected fees will help, in a small way, the Egyptian government.
12.  If you have a property in Egypt, pay your Property Tax now
13.  Pay your Zakat or Ushur in Egypt and donate to any good cause there.
14.  Do at least one of the above items now.

2.      You can help Egypt with your Expertise;
1.      If you are a Professor, become a visiting professor for free in a public university
2.      If you are a Doctor, take a sabbatical to treat poor Egyptians or perform operations for free
3.      If you are a Consultant, offer your free consultation to the proper government organization
4.      If you are an Expert in any field, offer your expertise to your counterparts in Egypt for free.
5.      If you are a Teacher, teach for free in orphanages, during your school vacation.
6.      If you are a Student, teach English for free during your summer vacation.
7.      If you have other ideas contact us on info@egyptianswithoutborders.org

The least you could do is:
1.      Help spread the word:
1.      Please forward this message Now to all your Egyptians contacts outside Egypt asking them to pass it on to their own contacts. We want to reach All Egyptians outside Egypt..
2.      Send a note to all your non-Egyptian contacts telling them Egypt is safe and open for tourists. Now is the time to have a winter vacation in Egypt. Sharm, Hurgada, Luxur, Aswan, Nile Cruise are safe and on sale now.!!
3.      Contact your Egyptian Consulate/Embassy demanding that Egyptians abroad must be allowed to vote starting next election. We want to take part in shaping Egypt future.

2.      And, show that you care:
1.      Become a member of “Egyptians-without-Borders”. It is Free
2.      Just visit our page on Facebook .http://www.facebook.com/pages/Egyptians-Without-Borders/154535117934861 and press “Like”
3.      Become an active participant with your ideas and comments on our page
4.      Share our page and messages with your contacts on facebook

3.      Please go back up and act on this email now.
4.      Please forward this email to All your Egyptian contacts outside Egypt.
5.

6.      God bless and protect Egypt.

Egyptians Without Borders.

One of the most devastating legacies of the Mubarak regime on Egypt, and one that will take years to overcome, is in education. Years of neglect have resulted in the collapse of the public educational system.  It is hardly surprising, therefore, to find that Egyptian students perform exceptionally poorly in international standardized tests.  According to this New York Times article, Egyptian 8th-graders placed in the bottom quartile of a 48 nation standardized test in mathematics.  More shocking, perhaps, is that seven other Arab countries were in the lowest quartile: Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, Palestine, Oman, Algeria, Syria and Qatar.  Qatar had the dubious honor of placing last.  Egypt’s decay was symptomatic of a general decay in the Arab public sphere, where ruling elites lost interest in development and busied themselves primarily in concocting schemes to enrich themselves.  As mentioned in an article I posted previously on shanfaraa.com, the Arab world is mired in oligarchical capitalism, which can be described in the following terms:

Oligarchic capitalism exists where power and money are highly concentrated among a few. It is the worst form of capitalism, not only because of the extreme inequality in income and wealth that such economies tolerate, but also because the elites do not promote growth as the central goal of economic policy. Instead, oligarchs fix the rules to maximize their own income and wealth. Such arrangements prevail in large parts of Latin America, the Arab Middle East, and Africa.

Until we Arabs get rid of oligarchic capitalism, we cannot expect substantial investment in the Arab peoples.  The current revolutions that are spreading throughout the Arab world are essentially an attempt to overthrow this entrenched system of oligarchy which cares only for itself.  The message they give their peoples is that of the early Islamic satirical poet Hutay’a, who lampooned a contemporary by saying:

دع المكارم لا ترحل لبغيتها واقعد إنك أنت الطاعم الكاسي

“Leave aside noble deeds and do not weary yourself in journey seeking them;

Instead, take a seat and rest, for indeed your stomach is full and you are well-clothed.”

That is what the Arab regimes have done to their people: convinced them that they can only aspire for food in their stomach and shirts on their back, but otherwise, they should have no dreams.  These revolutions are about reclaiming the peoples’ right to dream of a future that is more than just a full-belly and a comfortable shirt.