“A terrible dictatorship has arisen in Egypt,” Amos Gilad, head of the security branch of the Defense Ministry said Friday, adding that there was “no talk” between Israeli government officials and the Egyptian president, and “I don’t think there will be.” So prophesied the man who managed the excellent ties with the regime of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and has suddenly found himself face to face with a new Egyptian government. Gilad did not hide his anxiety over the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, “from whose point of view we do not exist,” and to which he attributes all-embracing aspirations to change the Middle East in its own image.
The defense minister’s bureau did well to distance itself from Gilad’s remarks and make clear that they do not reflect the position of the defense establishment. It would have been better if the defense minister himself had stated in his own voice the position of that establishment, which he heads, and what his assessment is of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Gilad’s position reflects the traditional arrogant attitude whereby anyone who doesn’t support Israel’s policies and who doesn’t want ties with Israel is necessarily a “terrible dictator.” According to that position, the aspirations and opinions of the Egyptian people, who brought the current regime to power and toppled the previous one, are of no importance whatsoever. To Gilad, the parliamentary and presidential elections, whose results reflected public opinion, that same public whose vote was given value for the first time, the distancing of the Egyptian military from involvement in politics, and the deep divisions under discussion as the constitution is framed, are a “terrible dictatorship.”
True, the Muslim Brotherhood is not Israel’s ideological ally. It is also far from being the fondest aspiration of the half of Egypt’s population that did not vote for President Mohammed Morsi. But Gilad has apparently forgotten that the same secular liberal population that does not support the Muslim Brotherhood is vehemently opposed to normalization of ties or cooperation with Israel because of Israel’s policies. Gilad, in contrast to the defense establishment that employs him, apparently has not assimilated the fact that there has been a democratic turnabout in Egypt, which presents Israel with new challenges. Those who seek good relations with Egypt will from now on have to persuade the Egyptian public that they are worthy of such relations and can no longer make do with a policy of exchanging winks with the ruler.
