Once Upon A Revolution: An Egyptian Story

Books such as this one do more to allow readers to gain insight into political change than any other form of journalism - in this case, the locale and incidents have to do with Egypt’s Tahrir Square revolution of 2005, the first major outpouring of the Arab Spring. The author interviews a handful of people as the revolution begins and follows them through the revolt’s initial stages, then the reach of these few into politics, their political repression, and finally, to the disintegration of these few’s ideals amid an eventual and common unease with a fight that would have of necessity to be one of long duration.In this respect this revolt had much in common with the leftist revolution that reared its head in the US in the 1960s. That is, endemic problems weren’t solved quickly enough to keep the populace from being uncomfortable with the inevitable counter-revolution, repression, both political and social, and the forces trying to improve poverty, income inequality, police relations among the poor, corruption. As a result, the democratic movement, as in the 60s revolts, fragmented.A couple of facets of the Arab Spring, as manifested in Egypt, are worth noting.The revolution was led by secular forces, and was eventually repressed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Those leading the revolution were committed to peaceful change, even in the face of beatings and murders by the police, the military, and eventually by the Brotherhood.Cambanis’ writing here is some of the best journalistic writing of this type I’ve read, despite English being a secondary language. He rarely repeats himself, his reportage is neatly laid out in chronological fashion, and he manages a studied objectivity throughout.And this brings up one other thought concerning what the Tahrir-ists were trying to do: We in the U.S., because we were the first to forge a significant national democracy, albeit at the beginning of our nation, tend to think that ours is perfect. All one has to do to be dissuaded of that attitude is to note the excusable lack of insight our founding fathers had into the power of corporations, globalization, mass politics, the flood of technology, particularly concerning communication and privacy issues, and a plethora of social issues. The Tahrir-ists did recognize these issues and openly desired to improve on what the U.S. has been trying to import to the Middle East in the name of democracy. Too, they realized the difficulty of trying to implement such a government and constitution without a modern prototype, particularly in an area of the world still tied by tribalism and religion to ancient socio-political constructs.My Rating: 18 of 20 stars

Cambanis provides on the ground reporting that unpacks the hidden dynamics that drove the Arab awakening in Egypt. The 2011 demonstrations gave rise to new hope for democracy in Egypt. Weary of a regime that demonstrators believed were ruled by force and favors, the take over of Tahrir Square gave the military the opportunity to force the aging President Mubarak to give up power. That led to elections that put the Muslim Brotherhood in power, where the shadowy group proved that its promise to respect religious tolerance and democratic pluralism was a canard. There was a joke about Islamists: they wanted one person, one vote, one time. Once in power they proceeded to prove the truth of that warning. Popular anger enabled the military to retake the reins of goverrnment. Cambanis' analysis is astute, although one can argue with his thesis that had reformers united they could have won the elections. This is a good read and an important book for those interested in understanding Egyptian politics.

ONCE UPON BAD REPORTING!!By: Fathi Aburafia The least that can be said about this book is that it is a kind of rubbish reporting on one of the most successful revolutions of what has been commonly known as the Arab Spring. The mediocre reporting of the author, Mr. Thamassis Cambanis, is a true example of his meagre knowledge of a complex issue he set himself to deal with, let alone his distortions, inaccuracies and sweeping generalizations. Since that the book lacks any merit of credible reporting and dealing with the issue in question, I shall dwell only on a few points that attest the author's bias a superficial analysis.Cambanis says that "Egyptian dictators had insisted that their subjects were incompetent, helpless sheep who needed a strong hand. Left on their own, they'd make a mess and starve to death." Needless to say how wretched and unfortunate is such a statement by an author who brags of being a resource person of the region's history and political developments. I dare to say I have never heard or read such an uncorroborated statement by or on any Egyptian dictator during my 74 year lifetime!!Referring to the Egyptian government's option to end a prolonged protest of Muslim Brother supporters in a residential square north of Cairo, the author claims that more than 700 protesters were slaughtered by the police and army, only echoing the stance of that religious organization that has been banned and designed as a terrorist organization in the wake of the many atrocities committed by its members against the Egyptian people during their inauspicious year of ruling Egypt. Neither the author tried to explain why he army and security forces opted finally, and after many pre-warnings to the protesters, to end the protest in Rabaa and Nahda Squares, where the protesters established a state within the state and caused havoc to residents of the two areas. They became a religious militia capturing people and holding them hostage, as they are doing now in North Sinai, let alone the disruption of the normal life of the people.In a sarcastic tone, the author says that the revolutionaries were chanting "the army and the people are one hand", unable or adamant to understand that that was the actual end result the people found themselves in. Only through their unity they managed to defeat the worst Islamic government that could have governed Egypt since the early days of Islam, 14 centuries ago; and only through their unity they managed to avert a state failure happening now in some neighboring states in the region.Fathi Aburafia

Easy to read, well researched, a story not told anywhere else

A small example of what is wrong with this book is the following. At the height of the "Egyptian revolution" American journalist Lara Logan was mass raped in Tahrir Square. Cambanis certainly knows, but fails to mention this rather significant episode. The inconvenient truth is that the heroes of Tahrir square were largely a mob of rapists. The book instead weaves a fairy tale revolving on two blandly amiable and politically insignificant characters. The whole may appeal to a western audience, but it has very little to do with Egypt..