The Egyptian government's announcement yesterday that it is studying the proposal put forward by interim prime minister, Hazem el-Beblawi, to dissolve the Muslim Brotherhood is cause for concern on many levels.
Such an enforced suppression of the Islamist organisation will only add further tinder to the already incendiary political crisis Egypt faces.
Every day the violence in Cairo only serves to further polarise all sides in this struggle for Egypt's political future. There are those within the Brotherhood willing to talk and take part in consensus politics. Sadly, the military regime with its crackdown has only alienated those moderates and perhaps pushed some members in the direction of jihadist recruiters. Making matters worse, Western nations have been found wanting when it comes to exerting diplomatic pressure on Egypt's military regime.
Those nations are, understandably, fearful of a powerful militant Islamist presence in Egypt. However, giving any tacit endorsement to Egypt's old dictatorial guard slipping into power by the back door is not a credible option.
In a recent interview, Egyptian actor and activist Khalid Abdalla eloquently pointed out that in Cairo right now, political choice is increasingly limited to either the military or Islamic extremists, both of which are "fundamentally fascist organisations".
He is right to say that the future solution has to be an inclusive one, with everyone represented. For 80 years now in Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood has grown to become a huge grass-roots political and social movement. Any move to forcibly dissolve it will only push the group underground and its more moderate members away from the framework of open political dialogue.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article