If you were to read a first draft of last year’s Egyptian revolution, it would probably have been written by a woman. The uprisings that spread across the country from late January were originally chronicled by prolific female writers such as Nawara Negm, who used everything from Internet blogs to appearances on al-Jazeera to spread information to the outside world. “Freedom is only for those who are ready to die” was her mantra, although the protesters’ tactics proved less extreme. Civil disobedience, marches and strikes were preferred to violence, with the number of women in Cairo’s Tahrir (“Liberation”) Square peaking at around 50 percent.
How dispiriting, then, a year-and-a-half on, to see a highly politicized female population relegated to near-onlookers during Egypt’s first bona fide presidential election race.
In Cairo today, there is no longer a sense of a traditionally patriarchal society yielding to the democratic spirit of the Arab Spring. Instead, the hundreds of thousands of women who contributed so much to the downfall of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak find themselves marginalized, if not ignored.
Commentators have made much of the 40 percent of seats won by the Freedom and Justice party of the Muslim Brotherhood in parliamentary elections earlier this year. Some have suggested that Egypt has replaced a Western-backed, secular dictatorship with an Islamic version, but for others the true headline figure was the paltry 12 seats for women out of a total of 498.
This translates into female representation of 2.4 percent compared with an already low UN world average of 19 percent. The 13 starting candidates in the presidential race — the run-off takes place on June 16 and 17 — were all men.
“The truth is that women were doing better under Mubarak,” said Dina Shobra, a 20-year-old law student at Al-Azhar University who is out shopping in downtown Cairo. Dina, who wears a headscarf and still lives at home with her parents and four younger siblings, thinks that a combination of complacency and fear has reversed the successes of the 18-day revolution.
“The complacency comes from conservative Egyptians who believe that a woman’s place is in the home,” she says. “The fear is of the army and its oppression.”
The scale of the challenge for women such as Dina becomes clear the moment Manal Abul Hassan speaks. She is a spokeswoman for the Muslim Brotherhood, and thinks there is “no problem whatsoever” in having only a handful of women in parliament.
“Social justice will be delivered anyway,” she said over the telephone. She condemns the women demonstrating against the excesses of the military: Allegations against the soldiers include forcing virginity tests on the unmarried and physically attacking women who have protested or written blogs. Hassan, arguably the most powerful female politician in Egypt, believes it is up to “fathers, brothers and husbands to march and protest on behalf” of women.
The notion of male “guardianship” prevails everywhere — from the cafes and restaurants dominated by pontificating men, to the huddles of teenage girls making do with cracked civic benches for a social life as burly male police officers keep an eye on them. One veiled Salafi woman, one of around 300 female candidates in the parliamentary elections, put her husband’s photograph on her campaign poster.
A teenager huddling on a bench, 16-year-old Noha Husseini, points to a shop close to Tahrir Square packed with posters of scantily clad US pop stars such as Rihanna and Beyonce.
“The young may be offended by many aspects of Western culture, but are not as shocked as the older generation,” she says. “You cannot change centuries of conservatism overnight. None of us want to become pop singers, but we do want to succeed as independent women. Going abroad may be the only way we can do this.”
Noha’s views, like those of so many other young Egyptians, are informed by the social media and blog posts that spearheaded the revolution — but they are as alien as Rihanna to many. Gender equality, to many, is just another undesirable Western import, like fast food and Hollywood films.
Mubarak was seen as a great friend to the West, especially to the US, and that very closeness now presents a huge challenge to feminism. The widespread desire to reject everything the dictator stood for, including his Western sympathies, is in fact helping Islamists to flourish while liberal progressives, including feminists, are being left behind.
The danger is that if Islamists dominate not only the parliament, but the executive and judiciary, women’s rights are likely to regress further. Suzanne Mubarak, the deposed first lady, pushed for pro-women legislation including the right of wives to sue for divorce and a quota system favoring female election candidates. The latter has already been scrapped, while the former is under threat. Disturbing new measures currently before parliament include reducing the age at which girls can marry to 14, while proposed changes in custody law will award children over eight to divorced fathers. It all amounts to a feeling of betrayal, but not one that is by any means new.
Asmaa Mahfouz, a 26-year-old activist, is now referred to as the “leader” of the Arab Spring revolt because she uploaded a video last year in February calling for men to join her and her protesting sisters. What the frustrating narrative of Asmaa and thousands like her proves is that Egyptian women are deemed fit to inspire and mobilize, but not to assert themselves in the political process.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers