RSSهمه نوشته های با برچسب: "محمود عزت"

محمود عزت در مصاحبه ای جامع با احمد منصور از الجزیره

Mahmoud Ezzat

دکتر. محمود عزت, دبیرکل اخوان المسلمین, در یک مصاحبه جامع با احمد منصور ، الجزیره ، تأیید کرد که انتخابات اخوان المسلمین برای ریاست جمهوری که قرار است در دوره آینده توسط اعضای دفتر ارشاد برگزار شود ، برای هر کسی که مایل است مقالات نامزدی خود را به عنوان یک کاندیدا ارائه دهد ، آزاد است..

در بیانیه خود به برنامه گفتگوی بیلا حدود (بدون مرز) در تلویزیون الجزیره, عزت توضیح داد كه مقالات نامزدی معمولاً نباید برای نامزدهای اخوان المسلمین مورد استفاده قرار گیرد بلكه لیستی كامل از كل شورای صد نفره اخوان برای انتخاب رئیس اخوان المسلمین و دفتر راهنمایی ارائه می شود. وی انکار کرد که راهنمای عمومی اخوان برای رهبری شورای عمومی شورا به او اجازه آزادی کار در تصمیم گیری نهایی خود را نمی دهد. وی همچنین فاش کرد که شورا اختیار دارد رئیس را در برابر هرگونه کوتاهی مسئول بداند و در صورت نیاز هر زمان وی را برکنار کند.

وی تأكید كرد كه این جنبش آماده است تا نهایت فداكاری را برای عملی كردن اصل شورا انجام دهد (مشاوره) در صفوف, با اشاره به اینکه شورای شورا رئیس و دفتر راهنمایی جدیدی را در سال آینده انتخاب خواهد کرد.

وی در مورد پوشش رسانه ای آنچه واقعاً در پشت صحنه دفتر راهنمایی اتفاق افتاده اظهار نظر کرد, با استناد به اینکه کمیته متشکل از چهره های برجسته ای مانند دکتر. عصام الریان و تعدادی از اعضای اداره ارشاد مسئول چاپ بیانیه هفتگی رئیس با آقای. مهدی عاکف آرزو دارد که اختلاف نظری جزئی داشته باشد. اولین دوره ریاست Akef در ژانویه به پایان می رسد 13, 2010 با این حال او قبلا اعلام کرده است; او هنوز تصمیم خواهد گرفت که آیا برای دومین بار به عنوان راهنمای عمومی گروه در سمت خود باقی بماند.

وی ادامه داد که عاکف 81 ساله اعضای دفتر ارشاد را قبلاً مطلع کرده بود که قصد استعفا دارد و برای دوره دوم خدمت نخواهد کرد. اعضای دفتر بلافاصله پاسخ دادند و از او خواستند که در سمت خود بماند.

در پیام هفتگی خود, مهدی عاکف به طور مبهم به نیت خود برای عدم اجرای دومین دوره اشاره کرد و از اخوان المسلمین و اعضای اداره ارشاد که مسئولیت مسئولیت را با او به اشتراک گذاشتند گویی که قصد دارد این سخنرانی خداحافظی او باشد. روز یکشنبه, اکتبر 17 رسانه ها ادعا کردند که رئیس اخوان استعفا را اعلام کرده است; با این حال رئیس بارها و بارها ادعاهای رسانه ای را رد کرد جایی که روز بعد به دفتر آمد و با اعضا دیدار کرد. وی بعداً با صدور بیانیه ای واقعیت را افشا کرد. ادعاهای رسانه ای در مورد عدم تمایل اداره ارشاد برای انتصاب دکتر. عصام الریان کاملاً دروغ است.

دکتر. محمود عزت اطمینان یافت که جنبش خوشحال است که فرصتی را در اختیار اعضا قرار می دهد تا نظرات خود را به اشتراک بگذارند, تأکید بر آن تجلی تطبیق قدرت با اندازه بزرگ و نقش اصلی موجود است, نشان می دهد که رئیس اخوان المسلمین از این کار بسیار خوشحال است.

وی تأكید كرد كه همه موضوعات برای تصمیم نهایی به اداره ارشاد برمی گردند كه در آن قطعنامه ها برای همه لازم الاجرا و رضایت بخش است, صرف نظر از اختلاف نظرها.

“من آنچه قبلاً اتفاق افتاده را دست کم نمی گیرم یا به سادگی می گویم هیچ بحرانی وجود ندارد, همزمان, ما نباید همه چیز را از متن آن خارج کنیم, ما مصمم به استفاده از اصل شورا هستیم”, او اضافه کرد.

قبلاً در جلسه بعدی اداره ارشاد بحث شد که شورای شوراهای این گروه تنها حق انتخاب عضویت در اداره ارشاد را برای هر عضو دارد, او توضیح داد. دکتر. خود عصام موافقت كرد كه انتصاب عضوی جدید در دفتر راهنمایی اخوان از زمان نزدیكی به انتخابات مناسب نیست.

عزت اظهار داشت که این اپیزود به دلیل پیشنهاد اداره ارشاد در میان دستگیری ها و بازداشت های مکرر امنیتی دولت به شورای شورا ارائه شده است.. ما تلاش زیادی می کنیم تا شورای شورا را برای انتخاب رئیس بعدی و اعضای دفتر راهنمایی درگیر کنیم. انتظار می رود کل موضوع حل شود, به خواست خدا, قبل از ژانویه 13.

در این جلسه توسط رئیس و اعضای اداره ارشاد MB تصمیم گرفته شد كه نامه ای به شورای شورا ارسال كنند, با تأکید بر اینکه تاریخ این انتخابات دیرتر از ماه ششم نخواهد بود. فرض بر این بود که مراحل پیش از انتخابات یا در طی آن برگزار می شود 5 اعضای جدید سال گذشته انتخاب شدند. این تصمیم شورای شورا است و نه اداره ارشاد MB. در نتیجه, شورای شوراهای گروه عمومی سرانجام به تصمیم اتفاق نظر خود در مورد برگزاری انتخابات در اسرع وقت رسید.

وی تأکید کرد که اخوان المسلمین, با اجرای قانون توسط آیین نامه داخلی آن سازمان یافته است. آیین نامه هایی که توسط قوانین مجلس شورا به تصویب رسیده و از آن حمایت می شود و قابل تغییر است. آخرین اصلاحیه در حال انجام با یکی از بندهای آن مدت دوره عضویت یک عضو اداره ارشاد است به این معنی که یک عضو نباید بیش از دو دوره متوالی خدمت کند.

برخی از اعضای اداره ارشاد به پایبندی خود به ماندن در دفتر برای سالها متهم شدند; دکتر. عزت ادعا كرد كه دستگيري هاي مكرر كه هيچ موردي را از سوي دفتر اجرايي مستثني نمي كند ، ما را بر آن داشت تا ماده ديگري را در آيين نامه داخلي اصلاح كنيم كه به عضو عضويت خود را حتي در صورت بازداشت نيز حفظ كند.. فقدان کار شریف برای رفاه کشورشان و مأموریت متعالی ما را بر آن داشت تا بر حفظ عضویت خود اصرار ورزیم. مهندس خیرات الشاطر به عنوان معاون دوم رئیس MB و دکتر باقی خواهد ماند. محمد علی بیش از اعضای دفتر اجرایی MB. انتظار می رود بیشر ماه آینده منتشر شود.

دکتر. محمود عزت شایعات مربوط به درگیری های داخلی گروه مخالف در رابطه با رهبری را کاملاً انکار کرد, با تاکید بر اینکه مکانیسم, مقررات و شرایط راه را برای انتخاب رهبران جنبش هموار می کند. وی همچنین اشاره کرد که وضعیت جغرافیایی مصر و وزن اخلاقی قابل توجهی که در جهان اسلام دارد ، نیاز مصری بودن رئیس MB را توجیه می کند.

“اداره ارشاد در حال بررسی روند کلی شورای صد نفره اخوان در رابطه با معرفی کاندیدای مناسب واجد شرایط تصدی ریاست است.”, او گفت.

“پیش بینی اینکه رئیس بعدی چه کسی خواهد بود بسیار دشوار است, توجه داشته باشید که 5 دقایقی قبل از انتصاب آقای. Akef به عنوان رئیس هیچ کس نمی دانست, آرا فقط تصمیم می گرفتند که چه کسی رهبر جدید باشد”, او گفت.

دکتر. محمود عزت گزارش های متناقض آشکار رسانه ها درباره ادعاهای آنها در مورد اظهارات رهبران عالی اخوان را ناشی از همان ناسازگاری گزارش های رسانه ها درباره رهبران ارشد دانست که از روزنامه ای به روزنامه دیگر متفاوت است.

دکتر. محمود عزت با حمله به ارقام امنیتی که منجر به دستگیری برخی شد ، ارقامی را روشن کرد 2696 اعضای گروه در 2007, 3674 که در 2008 و 5022 که در 2009. این امر منجر به عدم توانایی شورای شورا در برگزاری جلسات و شرکت در انتخابات شد.

وی همچنین تأکید کرد که اخوان المسلمین علاقه زیادی به حفظ امنیت ملی مصر و امنیت آن دارند’ علاقه به دستیابی به اصلاحات مسالمت آمیز در جامعه. “ما به خوبی می دانیم که جلسات اداره ارشاد توسط امنیت بررسی می شود ، اگرچه ما فقط قصد داریم دموکراسی را تمرین کنیم. در حقیقت, ما نمی خواهیم خصومت و خصومت دیگران را تحریک کنیم”.

وی همچنین تأکید کرد که اختلافات درون سازمانی ناشی از نفرت یا اختلافات شخصی نیست ، زیرا خلق و خوی شایسته ای که توسط تعالیم متعالی اسلام تشویق می شود ، ما را ترغیب به تحمل اختلاف عقاید می کند.. وی افزود که تاریخ ثابت کرده است که جنبش اخوان المسلمین بسیار دشوارتر از بحران موجود بوده است.

رسانه ها تصویری منفی از اخوان المسلمین ارائه داده اند كه در آن آنها برای اطلاعات به تحقیقات SSI اعتماد می كردند. ضروری است روزنامه نگاران در صورت داشتن نوعی اعتبار حقایق را از منابع اصلی دریافت کنند. در حقیقت قوه قضاییه تمام اتهامات گزارش شده در تحقیقات دولتی را باطل اعلام کرده است, او گفت.

دکتر. محمود عزت خوشبین بود که بحران سیاسی فعلی تصویب خواهد شد و اظهار داشت که وقایع اثبات می کنند که اخوان المسلمین با تمام آداب و رسوم اش, عینیت, و عمل به دموکراسی با رنگهای درخشان درخشان خواهد شد.

منتشر شده در Ikhwanweb

Dissenting Brothers

Founded in 1928, اخوان المسلمین (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.
Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.
The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, با این حال, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.
That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.
The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, با این حال, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.
Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.
That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.
The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.
The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.
But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.
The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Khalil Al-anani

Esam

Founded in 1928, اخوان المسلمین (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.

Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.

The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, با این حال, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.

That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.

The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, با این حال, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.

Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.

That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.

The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.

The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.

But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.

The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Published On Al-ahram Weekly