High-school hunger-strikers, Ivory Coast and Egypt stir debate and action among delegates A hunger strike by highschool graduates outside the library at Cheikh Anta Diop University greeted World Social Forum delegates on the final day of the event in Senegal. Around two dozen students, who lay on the ground under blankets, are understood to be angry about not getting places at the university. Judging by the signs stuck to nearby posts, the strike was clearly timed to send a message to a forum gathered to discuss ways to create a fairer world. One read: “Why [a] place for foreigners and not for children of the country?” Another said: “Our place is not on the street but in the lecture halls.” By lunchtime the Red Cross had arrived to check the health of the young people. One protester was taken away in an ambulance. Holding the forum at the university has been a bone of contention to some students, who have been removed from classrooms and the library to make way for delegates and the press. It seems classes were going to be cancelled to allow for the forum to go ahead, and to allow students to attend, but the plan was changed. Amy Faye, 22, a third-year economics student, said she didn’t mind the conference taking place, but would have liked time off to attend. “We’ve had to attend class. There’s been no time to attend the forum. It would have been good for us to discover things.” Faye didn’t give her full backing to the hunger strikers, suggesting instead that the whole student body could have been mobilised to take action. Another student said on Thursday that overcrowding is a major problem at the university, with packed halls of residence and classrooms. The cost of university is also believed to be causing simmering tension. A group opposed to military intervention in Ivory Coast set up tents and circulated a petition this morning calling on the international community – including the African Union, the Economic Community of West African States and the West African Monetary Union – to end the threat of sanctions following the outcome of last November’s presidential election. In a manifesto distributed on Friday, the group, calling itself the Civil Society Group Against Aggression, says there is “no legally defensible basis for the positions taken and for the threats of sanctions brandished against the government of Ivory Coast by the self-proclaimed ‘international community’ since the beginning of the crisis”. The group challenges the international community to “produce a single legal justification that is not an offence against international law or the dignity of Africa” for its actions in the wake of the disputed results. The group says the international community had no right to announce a provisional result by the independent electoral commission as definitive. It says a peaceful solution needs to be found, and advocates negotiations between Laurent Gbagbo and Alassane Outtara or a fresh election. The group is holding a press conference later today. Meanwhile, following Thursday’s rumours about the resignation of the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, a march from the forum to the Egyptian embassy took place on Friday afternoon. It is clear from talking to people at the forum that there is a strong belief that what has happened in Tunisia and Egypt could happen in Senegal and elsewhere in Africa. At a press conference on Thursday, a local organiser of the forum, Demba Moussa Dembele, said if people “moved and did something”, change could come. Elsewhere around the university campus, groups have been putting together their final presentations to the assembly of assemblies – the final meeting of the forum to showcase what the week-long discussions have achieved and to announce any plans of action. The final assembly begins at 4pm. World Social Forum Ivory Coast Egypt Liz Ford guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
• Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak has resigned • Vice-president announces the army council holds power • Cheers and fireworks as protests turn to celebrations ترجم هذه الصفحة إلى العربية 5.20pm: There are reports that the Egyptian army is to make another statement soon. 5.19pm: Nicholas Kristof, the New York Times Pulitzer prize-winning journalist, has been quick to instill a note of caution : But the game isn’t over, and now a word of caution. I worry that senior generals may want to keep (with some changes) a Mubarak-style government without Mubarak. In essence the regime may have decided that Mubarak had become a liability and thrown him overboard — without any intention of instituting the kind of broad, meaningful democracy that the public wants. Senior generals have enriched themselves and have a stake in a political and economic structure that is profoundly unfair and oppressive. And remember that the military running things directly really isn’t that different from what has been happening: Mubarak’s government was a largely military regime (in civilian clothes) even before this. Mubarak, Vice President Suleiman and so many others — including nearly all the governors — are career military men. So if the military now takes over, how different is it? 5.18pm: Harriet also contemplates how the downfall of Mubarak will play in Israel, his great ally: Israel will now be extremely uncertain about future relations with Egypt. The peace treaty between the two countries that has been in place for more than 30 years has not exactly made them warm allies, but the peace has held. Israeli ministers and officials have been warning for almost three weeks that regime change in Egypt could end the “cold peace”. Their worst fears are that the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood will gain in power and influence and Egypt will adopt a hostile attitude towards the Jewish state. They are also worried about the impact on Gaza, as Hamas has close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. There was no immediate reaction to Mubarak’s resignation from the prime minister’s office, although a statement was expected later tonight. Binyamin Netanyahu has been telling his international counterparts that Israel expects any future Egyptian government to honour the peace treaty and that the international community should be making that clear to an incoming regime. 5.17pm: Harriet Sherwood reports from Israel on the reaction to Mubarak’s demise from Hamas: I’ve just spoken to Mahmoud Zahar, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza. He was cautious in his reaction to events in Egypt, saying Hamas had no wish to interfere with Egypt’s internal affairs. But, he added, Hamas hoped to see an improvement in relations between Egypt and all Palestinians. “We are one family,” he said. The Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas’s close allies, “are present everywhere”, he said. He would not be drawn on whether a new Egyptian regime may wish to review the peace treaty it signed with Israel more than 30 years ago. “There is no clear picture about the new government, but it will be controlled by the army t begin with, he said. “We are hoping to benefit.” 4.59pm: Here’s some reaction from Qatar, from Reuters: The Qatari government said it regarded Egypt’s transfer of power to a military council on Friday as a positive step. “This is a positive, important step towards the Egyptian people’s aspirations of achieving democracy and reform and a life of dignity,” the statement from the Emir’s royal council said. 4.54pm: Mubarak picked an auspicious date to resign. On this day 32 years ago the Iranian revolution took place when the Shah’s forces were overwhelmed. And 21 years ago today Nelson Mandela was freed by the apartheid regime in South Africa. 4.50pm: Wael Ghonim, Google’s head of marketing in the Middle East, annointed by some as the voice of the revolution after his emotional speech on his release from prison, tweeted simply : “Welcome back Egypt”. 4.46pm: Reaction has started to come in from the US and the EU. The White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said: The president was informed of president Mubarak’s decision to step down during a meeting in the Oval Office. He then watched TV coverage of the scene in Cairo for several minutes in the outer Oval (office). The EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, said: The EU respects president Mubarak’s decision today. By standing down, he has listened to the voices of the Egyptian people and has opened the way to faster and deeper reforms. It is important now that the dialogue is accelerated leading to a broad-based government which will respect the aspirations of, and deliver stability for, the Egyptian people. The future of Egypt rightly remains in the hands of the Egyptian people. The EU stands ready to help in any way it can. 4.43pm: Tariq Ali has written a piece for Comment is free . He says: A joyous night in Cairo. What bliss to be alive, to be an Egyptian and an Arab. In Tahrir Square they’re chanting, “Egypt is free” and “We won!” The removal of Mubarak alone (and getting the bulk of his $40bn loot back for the national treasury), without any other reforms, would itself be experienced in the region and in Egypt as a huge political triumph. It will set new forces into motion. A nation that has witnessed miracles of mass mobilisations and a huge rise in popular political consciousness will not be easy to crush, as Tunisia demonstrates. 4.42pm: Barack Obama, who appeared humiliated last night when Mubarak gave that infamously equivocal statement, is to speak at the White House at 6.30pm GMT. 4.36pm: The Guardian’ s Twitter map of Middle East protests i s being overrun with outpourings of emotion from Egypt at the moment. It’s a great visual representation of the reactions in the country. Says @Port_Sa3eedy: “Someone slap me… I can’t believe…. I’m tearing down #egypt #mubarak ” 4.28pm: From amidst a cacophony of cheers, our correspondent Jack Shenker describes the reaction of the crowd outside the presidential palace. There was a complete eruption of humanity, I have never seen anything like it. The world’s biggest street party has really kicked off here. There are huge huge crowds of people jumping up and down suddenly as one. Suddenly everyone rushed into the road. I’m being slapped in happiness and bounced around. 4.27pm: Egyptian state TV is showing live pictures of the celebrtions in Tahrir square. “The newsreader is smiling and looks as happy as many of the people down there on the square,” says the anchor on al-Jazeera English. 4.23pm: The Egyptian pro-democracy campaigner Mohamed ElBaradei has cheered Mubarak’s resignation. “This is the greatest day of my life. The country has been liberated after decades of repression,” he told The Associated Press. He said he expects a “beautiful” transition of power. 4.20pm: Our correspondent Chris McGreal in Tahrir Square writes: “Cairo erupts in celebration as 18 days of defiant protest finally delivers a revolution after 24 hours of euphoria, dashed hopes and victory.” 4.17pm: We have now embedded a live video stream from Tahrir Square. You can watch it by refreshing this page. 4.12pm: The full text of the vice-president’s very brief statement: In these difficult circumstances that the country is passing through, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to leave the position of the presidency. He has commissioned the armed forces council to direct the issues of the state. 4.03pm: There are huge cheers in Tahrir Square. President Mubarak has gone and the army has been entrusted with the republic, it has just been announced. 4.02pm: Omar Suleiman is making a statement now. “President Hosni Mubarak has decided to waive the office of the republic.” 3.54pm: A potentially interesting development from Reuters: A senior Egyptian military spokesman arrived at the headquarters of Egypt’s state television on Friday, a military source told Reuters. Earlier, Egyptian state television had reported that the presidency was due to issue an important statement. 3.49pm: My colleague Harriet Sherwood sends this from Jerusalem: The Israeli media is reporting a telephone conversation between Mubarak and Israel’s trade minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a long-time friend, shortly before the Egyptian president’s speech last night. Ben-Eliezer told Israel’s Army Radio: “He knew that this was it, that this was the end of the road. He was looking for only one thing – give me an honourable way out. ‘Let me leave in an honourable fashion.’” 3.48pm: Here is an interactive map of the Guardian’s Twitter network of Arab protests. 3.44pm: Our correspondent Martin Chulov, who is monitoring events from Amman, says Egyptian state TV is now interviewing protesters. “This time, he must be gone,” Martin says . 3.43pm: We are awaiting a “statement from the presidency” – not, interestingly, from the president. In the meantime Hossam Badrawi, secretary general of the ruling NDP, has announced he has quit the party in an interview on Hayah TV , according to multiple sources. Yesterday he had been prominent among those who were predicting that Mubarak was about to stand aside. “It’s a resignation from the position and from the party,” Badrawi told al-Hayat TV. “The formation of new parties in a new manner that reflects new thinking is better for society now at this stage.” 3.41pm: Al-Arabiya TV is now reporting that police killed 5 people in the clashes in el-Arish ( see 3.32pm ). 3.32pm: There are reports of clashes in the north Sinai town of el-Arish. Al-Jazeera says at least one person died and 20 were injured when people with small firearms attacked a police station. From Reuters: Around 1,000 Egyptians attacked a police station in the north Sinai town of el-Arish on Friday to try to free prisoners, exchanging gunfire with police who retreated to the roof, witnesses said. The attackers set ablaze three vehicles outside and hurled petrol bombs during confrontation. 3.31pm: My colleague Richard Adams in Washington sends the following: White House official just said: Mubarak’s departure to Sharm el-Sheikh a “positive first step”. Also says Suleiman will be “clarifying” what his powers are. Egyptian TV says statement “from the office of the presidency” very, very shortly. Egyptian army tanks surrounding the presidential palace have turned their gun turrets away from the crowd, according to CNN. 3.30pm: On the Arabist blog, Issandr El Amrani has posted his instant thoughts on the situation as he sees it . It’s worth a read. Amrani believes it is “pretty evident that Suleiman is in charge”. He asks why the regime, including the army, still need Mubarak to be nominally in charge. He says: Mubarak needs to be in place, even if only symbolically, for amendments to the constitution to be made. If the constitution is suspended, then this forces the army to take charge itself (presumably through the supreme military council), which opens the way to demands for civilian government and lifts the last layer of distance that the army has vis-a-vis the people. 3.00pm: There are reports that president Hosni Mubarak has left Cairo. Helicopters have been seen leaving the presidential palace in Cairo, and a local government official has said he is in the red sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. After Mubarak’s speech last night, it appeared he had defied the people’s call for him to step aside. But today, Egyptian diplomats are briefing that he has indeed relinquished power to his deputy, Omar Suleiman. The army also stated that a handover of power had begun. The New York Times is portraying this as a significant moment in the protests . It says diplomats are trying to confirm that Mubarak’s speech last night “signalled his irrevocable handover of presidential authority”: Western diplomats said that officials of the Egyptian government were scrambling to assure that a muddled speech Mr Mubarak made on Thursday night that enraged protesters had in fact signalled his irrevocable handover of presidential authority. “The government of Egypt says absolutely, it is done, it is over,” a Western diplomat said. “But that is not what anybody heard” in Mr Mubarak’s speech. To read how events unfolded earlier today click here . Egypt Hosni Mubarak Middle East Live video Haroon Siddique Paul Owen guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Demonstrators continue to rally against the government after President Hosni Mubarak refused to resign
Continue reading …
Thousands of protesters have laid siege to the building housing Egypt’s state television station in the capital, Cairo. The march to the station on Friday came as hundreds of thousands again turned out across the country to demand that Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, resign. Al Jazeera’s Jacky Rowland reports from the scene of the siege in Cairo.
Continue reading …
Alaa Abdel Fatah, a prominent activist, speaks to Al Jazeera from outside the state television building in Cairo where thousands of protesters gathered on Friday afternoon.
Continue reading …Gainor Column: Journalism Is Dying and Newsies Decide Nowhere but Left to Go
February 11, 2011 No CommentArianna Huffington's crazy left-wing, pro-Democrat website gets bought out by AOL for $315 million. Professional Angry Man Keith Olbermann follows up by joining Al Gore's deservedly unknown Current TV effort. Before that, decrepit Newsweek was absorbed by one of the lesser liberal lights of the blogosphere – Tina Brown's Daily Beast. To journalists desperate for a direction – any direction – turning left seems an easy way to go. Forget MSNBC's brief propaganda attempt to “lean forward.” That is going nowhere. Old-style, supposedly neutral journalism is collapsing. Out of the rubble, we are seeing more and more journalists declare themselves to be what we've always known they were – liberal, left-wing, progressive or even ” socialist ,” as MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell admitted late last year. Faster than a congressman can take off his shirt, journalists have proven every complaint about media bias conservatives have leveled for decades. Yes, journalists are liberal. Yes, they blatantly spin stories to benefit both liberals and Democrats. Yes, hosts like Chris Matthews play ” Hardball ” with conservatives and play a thrill-ing game of slo-pitch softball with their Democrat buddies.
Continue reading …Robert Fisk on Mubarak’s stubborn refusal to go after his army and most of his own ministers turned on him: Last night, a military officer guarding the tens of thousands celebrating in Cairo threw down his rifle and joined the demonstrators, yet another sign of the ordinary Egyptian soldier’s growing sympathy for the democracy demonstrators. We had witnessed many similar sentiments from the army over the past two weeks. But the critical moment came on the evening of 30 January when, it is now clear, Mubarak ordered the Egyptian Third Army to crush the demonstrators in Tahrir Square with their tanks after flying F-16 fighter bombers at low level over the protesters. Many of the senior tank commanders could be seen tearing off their headsets – over which they had received the fatal orders – to use their mobile phones. They were, it now transpires, calling their own military families for advice. Fathers who had spent their lives serving the Egyptian army told their sons to disobey, that they must never kill their own people. Thus when General Hassan al-Rawani told the massive crowds yesterday evening that “everything you want will be realised – all your demands will be met”, the people cried back: “The army and the people stand together – the army and the people are united. The army and the people belong to one hand.” Last night, the Cairo court prevented three ministers – so far unnamed, although they almost certainly include the Minister of Interior – from leaving Egypt. But neither the army nor Vice-President Suleiman are likely to be able to face the far greater demonstrations planned for today, a fact that was conveyed to 83-year-old Mubarak by Tantawi himself, standing next to Suleiman. Tantawi and another general – believed to be the commander of the Cairo military area – called Washington, according to a senior Egyptian officer, to pass on the news to Robert Gates at the Pentagon. It must have been a sobering moment. For days, the White House had been grimly observing the mass demonstrations in Cairo, fearful that they would turn into a mythical Islamist monster, frightened that Mubarak might leave, even more terrified he might not. The events of the past 12 hours have not, alas, been a victory for the West. American and European leaders who rejoiced at the fall of communist dictatorships have sat glumly regarding the extraordinary and wildly hopeful events in Cairo – a victory of morality over corruption and cruelty – with the same enthusiasm as many East European dictators watched the fall of their Warsaw Pact nations. Calls for stability and an “orderly” transition of power were, in fact, appeals for Mubarak to stay in power – as he is still trying to do – rather than a ringing endorsement of the demands of the overwhelming pro-democracy movement that should have struck him down.
Continue reading …
Gallery: Hossam el-Hamalawy, a Cairo journalist, uses photographs to tell the inside story of protests on the streets of his city
Continue reading …
With more than 600000 orphans in Cambodia, we look at the booming business behind the country’s orphanages.
Continue reading …
US president’s decision to back revolt against Mubarak-led repression has implications for region’s autocrats Hosni Mubarak has still not grasped how fundamentally the old political order is changing in Egypt and the Arab world – but it seems Barack Obama has. In a forceful statement after the Egyptian president’s latest exercise in reality denial, Obama came off the fence following a fortnight of humming and hawing. If the choice is revolution or repression, democratic ideals and values or hard-nosed self-interest, then the US is officially on the side of the angels. This dramatic shift could in time have a bigger impact on the Middle East than the Egyptian uprising. In sharply criticising the Cairo government’s prevarications, demanding it respect universal values, and stressing that his administration stands shoulder to shoulder with the demonstrators in Tahrir Square, the US president dramatically changed the way his country does business in the region. This was, to all intents and purposes, the proclamation of an Obama doctrine. His statement was about Egypt but has a far broader application. He said, in part: “The United States has been clear that we stand for a set of core principles. We believe the universal rights of the Egyptian people must be respected, and their aspirations must be met. We believe this transition must immediately demonstrate irreversible political change, and a negotiated path to democracy. “To that end, we believe that the emergency law should be lifted. We believe that meaningful negotiations with the broad opposition and Egyptian civil society should address the key questions confronting Egypt’s future: protecting the fundamental rights of all citizens; revising the constitution and other laws to demonstrate irreversible change; and jointly developing a clear roadmap to elections that are free and fair…” He continued: “A new generation has emerged. They have made it clear that Egypt must reflect their hopes, fulfil their highest aspirations, and tap their boundless potential. In these difficult times, I know that the Egyptian people will persevere, and they must know that they will continue to have a friend in the United States of America.” The implications of this new doctrine, for that is how it must be viewed, are almost endless. The most obvious point is that since the US is backing the popular pro-democracy revolt in Egypt, it is bound in all conscience to do so elsewhere, as occasion demands. This is a direct challenge not just to Mubarak and his old guard but to the legitimacy of the previously untouchable, US-allied autocrats of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the Gulf. Universal values are universal after all. So what goes in Egypt will logically go, too, in Algeria, Jordan and Yemen, to name just three countries where America has largely turned a blind eye to repression in pursuit of wider security and commercial interests. The Obama doctrine implies readiness to intervene directly in a country’s internal politics in support of broader principles. In this instance, his stinging criticism of Mubarak’s failure to make “immediate, meaningful and sufficient” reforms was tantamount to a demand that he resign. It also risks the alienation of regional rulers and the fracturing of old alliances that have sustained US and western European policy since the cold war. The Saudis had taken a dim view of the US president’s undercutting of Mubarak; now they will wonder who might be next. Israeli leaders, too, are alarmed. They never quite trusted Obama. And repression of the Arab masses by Arab autocrats suited them quite well for, by and large, the Arab street has always been more hostile to Israel than the Arab elites. Israel, too, could hitherto pose as the region’s only real democracy. But that moral advantage is slipping, along with long-held strategic and defensive preconceptions. This uncertainty might yet jolt Israeli leaders out of their obstructive complacency over Palestine. Obama just accelerated this uncharted process. Events in Tunisia and then Egypt forced the US president down this road. But his speech in Cairo in 2009, about engaging and developing the Arab and Muslim spheres, showed he was not a reluctant traveller. Halfway through his presidency, he is finally beginning to define his own distinctive and transformational approach, after initially accepting most of the old US foreign policy shibboleths. In Afghanistan, overly influenced by his generals, he bought into the old way of doing things. Now, burned by that experience, he is forging a different path. This is not a return to the “liberal interventionism” of the Bush-Blair era. The Obama doctrine is not about brute force, but forceful beliefs. Even so, it is winning fans on the American right, as well as among Egyptians. “We need a foreign policy that not only supports freedom in the abstract but is guided by long-range practical principles to achieve it,” said columnist Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post. Thus the US should “use its influence to help democrats everywhere throw off dictatorial rule” and do more to build institutions and strong systems of law and media freedom in transitional democracies, he said. The US should not intervene directly in other countries’ affairs unless it was “to help protect them against totalitarians, foreign and domestic”, as in the cold war days of the Truman doctrine. By totalitarian, Krauthammer and similar thinkers mean Islamists of all complexions – for them, Islam is the new “red peril”. Obama is unlikely to embrace this definition. But in beginning to enunciate a foreign policy doctrine guided by clearly established democratic values and mutual respect, he may not only avoid more Egypt-style dilemmas, he may also be on his way to bridging the gulf between pragmatism and principle. Obama administration Egypt Hosni Mubarak Barack Obama Middle East United States US foreign policy US politics guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …