Egyptian Election: Islamist Victory - or Deceptive Strategy?
It is counterproductive for the West to eat straight out of the Brotherhood's hands and unquestioningly disseminate its unsubstantiated information, as the Islamists would like: It works to their advantage.
Has anyone stopped to ask where the headlines "Muslim Brotherhood wins Egypt's presidential election!" originated? They came, of course, straight from the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies, particularly the Qatari Islamist propaganda machine, Al Jazeera, and were then helpfully perpetuated by the mainstream media and talking-heads.
That allegation might sound suspiciously like a "conspiracy theory" were it not for the countless statements by the non-Islamist Egyptian media that were left unquoted by the western media, as well as many analysts who had a different tale to tell: The election was actually won by the secular candidate, Ahmed Shafiq.
What does the Muslim Brotherhood have to benefit by claiming victory now, if it might be proven otherwise three days from now, on June 21, when the results will be officially announced? Simple: they will be able to scream foul play—and gain the world's sympathy. For days the world will have been inundated with news that the Brotherhood won; when and if it hears that Shafiq won, it will naturally conclude that there has been electoral fraud -- as serves the Islamists' interests.
Mahmoud Baraka, a Shafiq campaign spokesman, maintains that "their candidate won the presidency, with 52% of the votes"—precisely the same number the Brotherhood is claiming—adding that the Brotherhood's claims to victory "are bizarre and unacceptable," a "big act."
Similarly, talk show host Tawfik Okasha appeared, emphatically saying that the Brotherhood's claims are "all lies," that most polls indicate their candidate, Muhammad Morsi "failed," and that the Islamist group's motive is simply to sow "discord and dissension." He then provided several examples of how the Brotherhood's claims are incongruous with reality.
Why believe Shafiq's spokesman and staunch secularist Okasha? Good question. Here's a better question: Why believe the Muslim Brotherhood?
Knowing the Brotherhood's deceptive tactics—"War is deceit" as their prophet said—there is good reason to think that they may have planned a propaganda victory well before the elections. They could claim victory, won fair and square; they could have their Islamist and Western media supporters trumpet it; they could embed it in everyone's mind for over three days before the results were formally announced— all to set the playing field to their advantage. If Shafiq wins, everyone—from militant Islamists in Egypt to a grandstanding US Secretary of State—will shout, "foul play!", thereby exonerating the long promised civil war Egypt's Islamists vowed to wage if the election did not go their way. So much for democracy. The rebellion they have threatened to stage would then be portrayed in the West as the result of a of a "grievance."
At this moment, no one knows which candidate won. The race is close. In the meantime, even though it is naturally the business of every news bureau to "break the news" and not be left behind, it is counterproductive for the West to eat straight out of the Brotherhood's hands and unquestioningly disseminate its unsubstantiated information, as the Islamists would like: It works to their advantage.
receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free gatestone institute mailing list
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum
Comment on this item
by Samuel Westrop
British politicians seem to be trapped in an endless debate over how to curb both violent and non-violent extremism within the Muslim community.
A truly useful measure might be to end the provision of state funding and legitimacy to terror-linked extremist charities
by Soeren Kern
"My son and I love life with the beheaders." — British jihadist Sally Jones.
Mujahidah Bint Usama published pictures of herself on Twitter holding a severed head while wearing a white doctor's jacket; alongside it, the message: "Dream job, a terrorist doc."
British female jihadists are now in charge of guarding as many as 3,000 non-Muslim Iraqi women and girls held captive as sex slaves.
"The British women are some of the most zealous in imposing the IS laws in the region. I believe that's why at least four of them have been chosen to join the women police force." — British terrorism analyst Melanie Smith.
by Khaled Abu Toameh
"Armed robbery in broad daylight." — Palestinians, after Hamas "seized" $750,000 from Gaza bank.
Fatah accused Hamas of "squandering" $700 million of financial aid earmarked for the Palestinian victims of war. Fatah wants to ensure that the millions of dollars intended for the Gaza Strip will pass through its hands and not end up in Hamas's bank accounts. Relying on Fatah in this regard is like asking a cat to guard the milk.
The head of the Palestinian Authority's Anti-Corruption Commission revealed that his group has retrieved $70 million of public funds fund embezzled by Palestinian officials. Arab and Western donors need to make sure that their money does not end up (once again) in the wrong hands. Without a proper mechanism of accountability and transparency, hundreds of millions of dollars are likely to find their way into the bank accounts of both Hamas and Fatah leaders.
by Mudar Zahran
"If Hamas does not like you for any reason all they have to do now is say you are a Mossad agent and kill you." — A., a Fatah member in Gaza.
"Hamas wanted us butchered so it could win the media war against Israel showing our dead children on TV and then get money from Qatar." — T., former Hamas Ministry officer.
"They would fire rockets and then run away quickly, leaving us to face Israeli bombs for what they did." — D., Gazan journalist.
"Hamas imposed a curfew: anyone walking out in the street was shot. That way people had to stay in their homes, even if they were about to get bombed. Hamas held the whole Gazan population as a human shield." — K., graduate student
"The Israeli army allows supplies to come in and Hamas steals them. It seems even the Israelis care for us more than Hamas." — E., first-aid volunteer.
"We are under Hamas occupation, and if you ask most of us, we would rather be under Israeli occupation… We miss the days when we were able to work inside Israel and make good money. We miss the security and calm Israel provided when it was here." — S., graduate of an American university, former Hamas sympathizer.
by Ben Cohen
Now, with the Islamic State's self-proclaimed caliphate having captured key oil wells in the Middle East this year, foreign oil has become an even more lethal financial weapon-of-choice for those seeking to destroy democracy and further escalate the War on Terror.
That President Barack Obama failed even to mention oil as a critical factor in the war against IS during his speech to the nation on September 10, is an omission both revealing and dangerous in terms of how his administration wants to depict the stakes involved in this latest confrontation with the jihadis.