Egypt: Mubarak sacks cabinet and defends security role

Click to play

Click to play

Egypt Unrest

President Hosni Mubarak has defended the role of Egypt's security forces in suppressing anti-government protests which have rocked the country.

Mr Mubarak also dismissed his government and said a new cabinet would be announced on Saturday.
It was his first statement since the protests - in which at least 26 have died with hundreds injured - began.
Tens of thousands took part in protests in Cairo, Suez, Alexandria and other cities.
Protesters set fire to the headquarters of the governing NDP party and besieged state TV and the foreign ministry.
At least 13 people were killed in Suez on Friday, while in Cairo, five people died, according to medical sources.
That brings the death toll to at least 26 since the protests began on Tuesday.
"I have asked the government to present its resignation today," Mr Mubarak said, adding that he would appoint a new government on Saturday.
He also said he understood the protesters' grievances but that a thin line divided liberty from chaos and he would not allow Egypt to be destabilised.
In a televised address shortly after Mr Mubarak spoke, US President Barack Obama said he had spoken at length with the Egyptian president and urged him to turn "a moment of volatility" into "a moment of promise".

Continue reading the main story 

The Reuters news agency later quoted witnesses as saying more than 20 military vehicles rolled in to central Tahrir Square shortly after midnight, scattering protesters into the sidestreets.

----------

Exit Ben Ali - but can Tunisia change?

By Prof Emma Murphy Durham University

Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali came to power in 1987 through a constitutional coup and he appears to have been removed from power through a constitutional coup.

The key here on both occasions was not the constitution but the army.

In 1987 the army moved to secure stability as an increasingly senile and paranoid President Bourguiba threatened to bring the country to a political and economic crisis.

Today it has moved to restore that same stability by removing a president whose person and family have become synonymous with corruption, growing wealth disparities, and political repression.

The question now is whether the interim leadership council will be used to move the country towards a democratic future through meaningful political reforms, free and fair elections, a liberalised media and a new inclusive approach to rule, or whether this is a stalling tactic by the army and the regime elite to quell protests and then restore their grip on power.
'Ben Ali's man'

The signs are mixed. Mr Ben Ali's departure has been described by Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi as temporary. The prime minister himself is a technocrat who was an architect of the very economic policies which the Tunisian public believe to have failed them.

He has been at the heart of the Ben Ali regime since very early on. He cannot himself be seen as anything other than Ben Ali's man, for all his oft-discussed personal integrity.

For all his language of constitutionalism, he is still backed by a state of emergency, enforced by the army and internal security forces.

Without serious reforms - and even so not within the six months pending the election - it is hard to see how this leadership council can oversee the emergence of a fully-functioning, genuinely representative form of political activism which can lead to a truly new regime.

The alternative is national government, inclusive of the various legal political parties and perhaps one or two others whom the military do not consider a threat to the stability of the country and its relations with important allies such as the US and the EU.

But the legal opposition are weak, personalised, factionalised and compromised by years of collusion with - or submission to - the Ben Ali regime.

Can they deliver anything more for the Tunisian people?

Probably not. But if democracy is going to come, the leadership council needs to make very early indications that there will be substantial reforms to the political party system, the election processes, freedom of association, civil rights and the freedom of the media well in advance of the elections.

An early end to the state of emergency and some clear indication that the committee into corruption announced a few days ago will directly address the activities of the Ben Ali and Trabelsi clans would go a long way towards convincing Tunisians that, this time, the promises of constitutional rule will be fulfilled, that this time national reconciliation will really mean just that, and that the army, in defending stability, will not once more succumb to the defence of authoritarian rule.

Emma Murphy is a professor at the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University and an expert on Tunisian affairs.

----------

                                                       Supporter in Tucson Courtroom

In Defense of Raza/Indigenous Studies: Five sentenced, but not guilty!

It is the law that is illegal

By Roberto Dr. Cintli Rodriguez

Four students and I were just sentenced to 10 hours of community service for a crime we did not commit. More importantly, our act of civil disobedience was in response to an illegal, immoral and unconstitutional law: hb 2281 – a piece of legislation that makes the teaching of Ethnic Studies in Arizona illegal.

Back in May, 15 of us were detained as a result of refusing to leave the 2nd floor of the state building because the state superintendent of schools refused to speak to our community. About a thousand of us – mostly middle, high school and college and university students, plus community members – had been awaiting his arrival earlier at TUSD headquarters where he had come to gloat because Gov. Jan Brewer had just signed an Inquisition-style law that made it illegal to teach Ethnic Studies. Rather than showing, he opted to have an impromptu press conference at the state building instead. Using Martin Luther King Jr. as a prop, he continued, and he continues, to claim that his actions to destroy and eliminate ethnic studies, comply with MLK’s dream of a color-blind society.

Despite the 15 of us doing the same civil act of disobedience, we have all been treated differently.  Two were outright acquitted. Of the original 15, three  remain. They will be tried March 3.

As far as many of us are concerned, the battle over hb 2281 has just begun; the teaching of ethnic studies became illegal on Dec 31 and Mexican American Studies-TUSD was ruled out of compliance on Jan 3. We are not only convinced of the law's illegality,  we are certain of it because of the unambiguous actions of the state legislature. The same day the president came to Tucson, a new Republican-introduced bill (src 1010) called for Arizona to be exempt from international law. As written, it will go to the voters in 2012. The thing is, this issue has already been litigated in U.S. courts. But since when has that stopped our 19th century state legislature?

Yet, state legislators' attempt to nullify international law in Arizona is outright proof that the forces of hate in and out of the legislature are fully aware that hb 2281, sb 1070 (the legislation that promotes racial profiling) and the efforts to nullify the 14th amendment all are illegal, immoral and unconstitutional. Beyond being unconstitutional, all the Arizona anti-Mexican laws, under the rubric of anti-immigrant laws of the past 10 years, violate virtually every international human rights treaty and convention. Under such treaties, in regards to hb 2281, the right to education, history, language and culture is sacrosanct. These treaties are in place in order to protect small nations, peoples and cultures from being swallowed up by hostile larger ones (http://drcintli.blogspot.com/2011/01/updated-hornes-law-or-hornes-great.html).

At the moment, there is a lawsuit against the state over hb 2281; this involves 11 educators who are challenging the constitutionality of the law (saveethnicstudies.org).

It is also not out of the realm of possibility that a case(s) will be taken to the Organization of American States or the United Nations. What’s at stake here is not simply the right of 11 teachers to teach, but rather, the right of all peoples (students) to education, history, language and culture. In Arizona, everything has been flipped upside down. Things Greco-Roman are deemed to be American and part of Western Civilization, whereas things Indigenous (MAS-TUSD Indigenous-maiz-based curriculum) are deemed to be un-American and alien.

That’s why many of us were arrested. In one sense, it’s a 42-year struggle; the same battle – one over legitimacy – that’s been waged since the creation of Ethnic Studies. At another level, it’s a 518-year clash of civilizations, even though it needn’t be (the civilizations can absolutely co-exist). Yet in actuality, this is part of a battle to preserve and maintain (and to teach and learn about) a 7,000-year AmerIndigenous maiz-based culture. Nothing less.

That’s why many students walked out in May. That’s why many were arrested. That’s why many continue to run, walk, vigil, protest and why others in the future – in the actual tradition of MLK Jr. – will commit to further acts of civil disobedience. We are not satisfied with hiding our culture in the home. And that’s why we welcome the OAS and the UN to examine Arizona’s lunacy in their forums and courtrooms.

At the moment, TUSD has until April 16 to be in compliance (i.e. eliminate MAS). One thing is certain, if it ever came to that, many of us will teach MAS/Indigenous Studies in front of the state building and/or the state capitol until the courts fix this symbol of the new Inquisition.

Rodriguez, a professor at the University, can be reached at: XColumn@gmail.com. The column is also posted at: http://drcintli.blogspot.com/