Some Egyptians are asking themselves questions of this type: is there a relationship between spoiled imported Russian wheat and businessman Hisham Talaat Mustafa? Is there a relationship between Mustafa and pigs cull? Is there a link between the danger of swine flu and the state's subsidies on basic goods, mainly bread? What is the link between bread subsidies and President Barack Obama's visit to the Egyptian capital and the speech he will deliver to the Muslim world, from Cairo, next Thursday? What is the relationship between Obama's speech and the Hezbollah cell, whose case is expected to be transferred from the public prosecutor in a few days, to a State Security Court? What about the relationship between this issue and the candidacy of Minister Farouq Husni to lead UNESCO? Is there something that links Husni's candidacy and the public property mafia, whose leaders are gaining control of wide expanses of land, buying and selling it, and making billions in profits, at the expense of the rest of the people? There is no room here to list all the divisive issues among segments of the Egyptian public, or between the rulers and the opposition, or between sectors and individuals in the “ruling regime,” or even among opposition forces, of various types. As soon as the issue arises, the conflict and struggle between two or more camps begin, whatever the issue. It does not matter if it is spoiled Russian wheat, or the imprisonment of Talaat Mustafa. There are those who defend the wheat deal and try to prove that it is sound; there are those who “detonate” the issue, revealing wheat-related corruption and its harm to the health of consumers. The same goes for the State Security Court decision to refer the case of businessman Mustafa and the former officer Hussam al-Sukkari to the mufti, to obtain his opinion about executing them. One group appeared, defending Mustafa and casting doubt on the verdict and the judge who issued it. Another group is defending the reputation of the Egyptian judiciary and trying to engineer an endorsement of the verdict against Mustafa and his colleague, even before the mufti offers his opinion or the judge delivers the verdict formally in a session on 25 June. When the matter of subsidies for basic foodstuffs is raised, it almost turns into a fight between those who defend the subsidy and those who consider it a reason for the spread of corruption between government agencies and those in charge of getting the goods to the needy. No issue in Egypt enjoys a national consensus, or sees agreement between the government and the opposition. Amid the struggle of political groups or various segments of the population, corruption continues; it penetrates and spreads, without anyone sensing it, until a new issue arises, causing the same commotion, which helps conceal the efforts of the corrupt, who upgrade themselves and their mechanisms, while the rest maintain their old methods of covering things up, without being aware that they are concealing old acts of corruption. Interestingly, Egyptian newspapers published a few days ago information about a deal to bring salmonella-tinged Katakit into Egyptian markets, with no one aware of what finally happened to the goods. This happened before any side announced the results of the investigation into the spoiled Russian wheat deal. It is true that the well-entrenched bureaucracy sometimes leads to incompatibility in decisions and official measures, which makes it easy for the corrupt to escape within the networks of government departments. However, we also know that the corruption in local administrations has gotten so bad that it not only makes the lives of Egyptians difficult, but also threatens their very lives. A few years ago, Dr. Zakariya Azmi, the head of the president's diwan, said in Parliament that the country was “knee-deep” in corruption; his expression was used whenever an incident of corruption arose. However, it seems to have reached higher than the knees; it appears to have become a sea of corruption, in which all simple folk, who have no concern except securing the minimum essentials of daily life, are drowning. The conflict of interests has become clearer and more prominent, to the degree that it has become difficult to settle any bone of contention. If such a state of affairs is acceptable when it has to do with politics, the public's lack of confidence in the safety of what they eat (like the processed meat now in Egypt after reports of thousands of tons of pork that was slaughtered, without a single official appearing to deny or confirm the information) solidifies the belief that drowning in a sea of corruption…has become inevitable.
