Egyptian ultras hint at renewed clashes with security forces
Ultras demand explanation and justice
By James M.
Dorsey
With Cairo’s
Tahrir Square role as a staging ground for revolutionary fervor in limbo,
militant Egyptian soccer fans who played a key role in toppling President Hosni
Mubarak are focusing once again on the beautiful game.
The focus
is likely to be temporary as newly elected President Mohammed Morsi and Egypt’s
military rulers seek to a working arrangement that enables the Muslim
Brotherhood to project itself as the guardian of the uprising’s aspirations
while maintaining the military’s political influence, immunity from civilian
oversight, and economic privileges.
Already,
some recent protests held in memory of those that lost their lives in clashes
with security forces over the past 18 months have escalated into demonstrations
against an alleged deal between Mr. Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood and the
military. Perceptions of such a deal have been reinforced by Mr. Morsi’s first
foreign trip as president to Saudi Arabia, which is widely seen as supporting
the military and hostile to the Brotherhood.
Tahrir
Square may have returned to normal for now, but the issue of the military and
the security forces remains center stage even when it comes to soccer. The
militant soccer fans or ultras – well-organized, highly politicized, street battle-hardened
soccer fans -- fought security forces in the stadiums in the four years prior
to Mr. Mubarak’s downfall and have since emerged as the vanguard of opposition to
a continued military role in politics.
In a
statement on Facebook, the Ultras White Knights (UWK), the militant support
group of crowned Cairo club Zamalek SC, demanded this week that the interior
ministry explain its five months-old ban on spectators attending soccer
matches. The ban has been in place since February when 74 fans died in a soccer
brawl in the Suez Canal city of Port Said in the worst incident in Egyptian
sporting history that is widely believed to have been an effort by the military
and the security forces to teach the ultras a lesson.
The call
for an explanation followed an announcement by the Egyptian Football
Association (EFA) that the country’s premier league would restart in late August
after the holy month of Ramadan. The league like the ban on spectators at
international matches has been suspended since the Port Said incident.
EFA
spokesman Azmy Megahed said resumption of the league was dependent on the
government’s approval of increased security measures at stadiums that would
include the installation of video cameras and metal detectors.
“The
dismantled regime used to impose its ideas by force, and that eventually led to
our great revolution. We are now building a new country on the basis of
cooperation and justice. We, as ultras groups, offered solutions to many
problems ... but we were surprised with the indifferent response we got. We now
want all the concerned parties to announce valid reasons for the existence of
the crowd ban. We hope you take into consideration the fact that your response
will shape our decision regarding the upcoming games,” the UWK said.
The
statement constituted a veiled threat that supporters of Zamalek as well as of
its arch Cairo rival Al Ahly SC could return to their violent tactics in a bid
to force their way into the stadium when their two teams play an African
Champions League match against one another on 22 July in Cairo’s Military
Academy Stadium.
The UWK
statement came two days after Ultras Ahlawy, the Al Ahli support group, forced
their team to cancel a training session by invading the pitch to protest their
club’s perceived failure to stand up for the 74 Al Ahli fans who were killed in
Port Said.
“We remind
everyone that today’s expression of anger is a normal response to the club’s
indifference to the rights of our martyrs… What happened was not an accident.
It was a disaster and if it happened anywhere else, it would stay in people’s
memory for years and years. It is not a question of days and then life is back
to normal,” the Ahlawy said on their Facebook page.
Major
General Adel Ghadban, the military governor of Port Said, was scheduled to
testify on Sunday in the trial of 73 suspects, including nine police officers,
charged in connection with the death of the soccer fans.
The
simmering confrontation between the militants, the security forces and the
clubs is fuelled by an ever widening gap between the fans and players and a
fundamental difference in ideology.
The Ahlawy said
they had disrupted the training because “the players did nothing but shed
crocodile tears. Not one of them expressed real sympathy for the martyrs… The
players didn’t even wear mourning armbands; instead, they partied and danced
happily on many occasions without any sign of solidarity with their dead fans….
We will never forget the martyrs and if
mass demonstration could work, that is the easiest thing for us to do,” the Ahlawy
said referring to their role in toppling Mr. Mubarak. The statement made no
reference to the fact that several Ahly players retired after the Port Said
incident.
Players and
fans in Egypt have been at loggerheads as a result of both the militants’
perception of the players as hired guns whose loyalty to the club is determined
exclusively by their salary and the failure of the vast majority of players to
join the uprising against Mr. Mubarak. Egyptian soccer star Mohamed Zidan has
in many ways come to symbolize the gap and a key problem Egypt and other
post-revolt Arab countries face in transition from an autocratic to a more open
society.
Soccer fans
expressed anger after security forces disclosed earlier this month that Mr.
Zidan, a striker in the Egyptian national team and for Germany’s FSV Mainz 05,
had visited Mr. Mubarak’s son Gamal in prison where he is being held on
corruption-related charges. In doing so, Mr. Zidan who earlier sparked
controversy by describing the ousted president as the “father of all Egyptians”
focused attention on how Arab soccer players and managers had accepted the positioning
of Arab autocrats as the nation’s father figure in what Palestinian-American
historian Hisham Sharabi called.
Mr. Sharabi
argued that Arab society was built around the "dominance of the Father
(patriarch), the center around which the national as well as the natural family
are organized. Between ruler and ruled,
between father and child, there exist only vertical relations: in both settings
the paternal will is absolute will, mediated in both the society and the family
by a forced consensus based on ritual and coercion."
In other
words, Arab regimes franchised repression so that in a cultural patrimonial
society, the oppressed participated in their repression and denial of rights.
The regime is in effect the father of all fathers at the top of the pyramid. In
the words of Egyptian journalist Khaled Diab quoted by journalist Brian
Whitacker in a book exploring the nature of Arab soicety, Egypt's problem was
not simply an aging president with little to show for himself after almost
thirty years in power, but the fact that "Egypt has a million (president
Hosni) Mubaraks.”
As a
result, the patriarchal values that dominate soccer in addition to its
popularity made it the perfect game for neo-patriarchs who hooked their
prestige to that of the beautiful game and feted players with expensive gifts including
expensive real estate and cars as well as significant amounts of cash for their
successes on the soccer pitch.
The battle
between the autocrats and the ultras turned the stadiums into battlefields for
control with the ultras viewing themselves as the venue’s only legitimate
owner. In their statement after interrupting the training, Ahlawy quoted iconic
player and former Al Ahly chairman Saleh Selim as saying that “the Ahly club is
owned by those who built it, and its fans are those who built it.”
James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam
School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University in
Singapore, and the author of the blog, The Turbulent World of Middle East
Soccer.
Comments
Post a Comment