![JPEG - 396.9 kb](/web/20190101131534im_/https://mondediplo.com/local/cache-vignettes/L890xH583/28244961825_547db950ac_k-f6e5c.jpg?1546253738)
The latest terrorist attack in Egypt that targeted a Vietnamese tourist bus, killing three tourists and the Egyptian tour guide and injuring a dozen tourists, may cast doubt on Egypt’s counterterrorism strategy. However the regime is unlikely to revisit this: it denies the existence of any connection between Egyptians’ current depoliticisation and the expansion of terrorism. Meanwhile, terrorist groups are fully aware that the killing of foreign tourists and Egyptian Copts strikes at Egypt where it is most vulnerable, weakening the economy.
Fighting terrorism is exclusively the mission of the Egyptian security apparatus since the belief is that terrorists can only be got rid of by expanding security measures. Forty Egyptian terrorists were killed in the immediate aftermath of the attack, raising the question of why they had not been arrested before if the security apparatus was already aware of their existence. Meanwhile, the absence of justice is worsening by the day. This makes militant Islamists believe, quite wrongly, that if they weaken the state through use of violence, it will eventually make for a fairer society.
President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi thinks that Egypt belongs only to citizens who comply with his policies fully, blindly and explicitly; he positions his diverse adversaries (most of whom are marginalised, and their leaders in prison) as enemies of the state. This policy has in turn encouraged militants to expand their policy of violence to keep their organisations alive.
The Egyptian Tour Guide Syndicate has denied and strongly condemned prime minister’s announcement, immediately after the latest attack, claiming that the tourist bus had changed its prearranged, secured route at the tour guide’s instigation. And Egyptians are asking questions on social media. How could the terrorists have learned about the alleged reroute at such short notice? And why are civilians automatically blamed for shortcoming by a state ruled by the security apparatus?
Islamist groups won nearly three-quarters of the eligible votes in the only fair and free election in modern Egyptian political history, the 2011 parliamentary election – a fact we need to keep in mind. Classifying all members of this wide political spectrum as permanent enemies of the state can only encourage them to engage in violence.
The authorities claim that Islamists have lost their popularity among Egyptians, a false rhetoric that won’t undermine their power on the ground. Islamists not only have a strong presence in our society, they have managed to drag our security apparatus into a deadly battle, undercutting efforts to fight social crime. The state’s hold on the Egyptian economy has resulted in the shrinking of private enterprises that don’t foresee any positive indicators. And the tourism industry, above all, will naturally be decimated by any terrorist attack.
Egypt has explicitly declared that no nation can guarantee complete security. Meanwhile the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been in power once (and only for 365 days) during its 90-year existence, won’t give up politics easily. These stances suggest that Egypt’s struggle with terrorism, which has turned us into a rigid, polarised society accustomed to the loss of many innocent lives, will continue for years to come.
Egypt’s inability to reduce terrorism should prompt the state to reconsider its approach. Opening political channels to Egyptians, listening to a range of voices that do not agree with the present policy, and strengthening the rule of law are some of the remedies that could save Egypt from this vicious circle of violence. Sadly, foreign tourists, who boost our economy, and innocent Egyptians, who by accident or obligation are on the frontlines of this deadly battle, are paying its price.