McCain is not Ikhwan backer

Unlike what is said of him these days in the Arab media, Republican Senator John McCain is one of the most respectful US politicians ever. He has been an outspoken advocate of Arab causes such as Syria, Palestine and others.
He was the one who warned against ignoring the Syrian issue some two years ago when the revolution began.
He tried to persuade the US president and congressmen to go for a military option against Bashar Assad instead of only providing support to the refugees. Everything that he had warned of is happening today.
But, when McCain went to Egypt he angered the majority. They accused him of favoring the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan). Others even went on to say that he was trying to impose Brotherhood rule on the Egyptian people. No doubt McCain’s visit added fuel to fire and stoked the situation.
Brotherhood was negotiating a truce with the help of religious and political leadership, but after the American involvement they became obstinate considering McCain’s visit as a support to their cause. McCain, however, insists that his visit was not aimed at piling pressure on any group but to show his country’s concern for Egypt and to encourage parties to find a solution to the crisis.
In my opinion, McCain is confusing Syria with Egypt. Gen. Al-Sisi is not Assad, nor is the Egyptian Army an army of a minority group. Hence there can be no comparison between Syria and Egypt.
Brotherhood is harping on three issues: Deposing Mursi is tantamount to violating the legitimacy of the electorate; the revolution of June 30 was a coup; and that the Muslim Brotherhood rule is more capable of preventing terrorism.
The truth is that the Egyptian issue is confusing for outsiders.
It is absolutely true that people had elected Mursi as president, but his group tried to control the state and push Egypt toward the Iranian model that poses threat to world peace. Secondly, the army intervened only when the country reached a dangerous stage.
The third claim that the Brotherhood can counter extremist groups does not hold ground. Muslim extremist groups do not pay heed to other moderate groups. They merely fight anybody who is the leadership position. Brotherhood has attacked moderate Islamic groups.
It is now blamed for the deterioration of security situation in Tunisia. Jihadists are criticizing Nahda Party there and blaming it for the fall of the government and the Islamic Nahda Parliament. They killed two opposition leaders that triggered resentment among the people of Tunisia toward Nahda Party.
I, like many others, am convinced with only one part of McCain’s vision. It is absolutely necessary to involve the Muslim Brotherhood in the government. This is what almost all others say — Mohammad ElBaradei, Hamdeen Sabahi and even the army.
The objection is in the Muslim Brotherhood’s way of running the affairs of the government. They must establish full and not selective democracy. They must approve a constitution that can grant rights to everybody and protect their freedom. They should and must respect the separation of the three powers.
The deposed president and his group tried to sideline these issues and that prompted other powers to intervene.

• [email protected]