Why Egypt has escaped the same thus far

Pictures coming out of Iraq are telling. They warn the world of a brutal and heartless Caliphate-seeking Islamist group. ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) or ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and Levant) has set itself to change the geographical pattern of the Middle East.

ISIS has taken over Takreet and Mosul, and pledges to take over Baghdad. In the process, it resorts to mass killings—according to ISIS, 1700 soldiers have been murdered. ISIS itself takes pride in marketing these horrendous scenes to instill fear in others; and the tactic is succeeding—Iraqi soldiers flee the scene in droves. I don’t blame them, for if caught, they will end up in a ditch, shot, with hundreds others. Why bother they say?

The scene witnessed in the falling cities is an extension of what is happening in Syria, and a mirror image of what is happening in Libya. Lo and behold, though at the brink of same, why isn’t Egypt facing the same doom? What saved Egypt from the same destruction? And can Egypt descend to the same level of chaos faced by these Arab countries?

Historically, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, and the Arab World in general were tribal states. They were clustered into almost-random formations to serve the British and the French supremacy of the region during the Sikes Picot era. A history of allegiance to the country Iraq or the country Lebanon does not exist beyond 100 years. Kurds, Sunnis, and Shias all want an Iraq of their own. This while Egypt, as a political entity, has existed for thousands of years held together by the Nile and its flow.

Second, Egypt has been and remains Sunni. The Shia in Egypt does not construe a power—a few hundreds at most. Hence, allegiance, if by Islam, is to one entity: the Sunni one. On the other hand, Egyptian Christians, Copts in particular, could’ve played a role in inciting a sectarian war in Egypt. They have been terrorized and brutalized for decades, and it would’ve been quite understandable to act up against such an environment. However, Copts, wisely, maintained a level of forgiveness and understanding in the hopes that Egypt remains a land for all.

A more important reason is that Egyptians, as recent history can tell, fight tyranny back, be it in the shape of Israelis taking over Egyptian land or dictators splitting the country into favoured clan and others. Sadat performed a miracle in ’73 and complemented it in ’79 with the Camp David Accord, the Peace Treaty. If it weren’t for Sadat, Egypt could’ve lost Sinai forever as Syria did with the Golan Heights, and Egypt could’ve remained at war with Israel as the Palestinians have. No matter what his other defects were, Sadat accomplished the impossible back then.

Sisi, similar in his accomplishment to Sadat, refused to let Egypt go down the Iraqi and Syrian route. Morsi was leading it to an abyss. Egyptians watched Muslim Brotherhood members enjoy preferential treatment, flee prisons, be pardoned, and assume a gripping hand on Egypt. Sisi took the initiative and ousted Morsi. Today Morsi and his clan are imprisoned awaiting trials and verdicts, and Sisi leads the country.

But the most important reason for Egypt’s better fate is in the fact that both leaders, Sadat and Sisi, had powerful and aligning armies to depend on. Maybe Sadat relied more on his cunning nature than the strength of his army, as Sisi did, but had these men had mediocre armies, or armies with split allegiance, Egypt may have looked entirely different today.

In many incidents, the security apparatus in Egypt faulted. Flounders of accidental nature but horrific consequences, 37 gassed-to-death prisoners in the back of a van; or of deliberate nature, the virginity tests, will haunt the army and the police for years. And yet under no circumstances should these pillars upon which Egypt’s strength lies be humiliated or made fun of again. For it is by them and on them that this country will remain standing. With the way things are looking all around Egypt—from Iraq to Syria to Libya—Egypt’s army must remain powerful and strong.

Activists, still after the army and Sisi, should give the neighbouring countries a careful look. Egypt is surrounded by destruction, and the call for change by elements from within Egypt and from other neighbouring countries is too close to ignore. If it is up to Islamists, Egypt may ultimately join the beleaguered bandwagon.

To activists I say, continue to criticize failures and continue to bring flaws to the forefront, but simultaneously call for a unified Egypt.