Madina Newspaper The current debate in Egypt over how to celebrate the first anniversary of the January 25 revolution reflects a social and political dispute within Egyptian society. The dispute is not about how the event should be celebrated but about the event itself. Is it a revolution, an uprising or merely a commotion? However, the debate — with all its ramifications — manifests an incident that happened in history. Major revolutions are staged against major grievances. To achieve the goals of the revolutionaries, major changes which sometimes entail major destruction have to take place. Sweeping changes, along with destruction, will affect the interests of groups which supported the fallen regime. They are part and parcel of the regime, thus when the regime falls, they fall with it. That is why these groups fight tooth and nail to stop the revolution which is still trying to destroy the old system. The longer the destruction process takes and the more obstacles the revolt faces, the less public support it gets. The general public want quick results and do not want to wait for inspiring leaders to come and lead the unfinished revolution. Egyptians are divided. They do not know whether to mark January 25 as a celebration of the revolution or as an end to the oppression and tyranny of the police force, or both. This division reflects different public opinions about the revolution and the police force. Those who are divided about the revolution have different motives. Some regard the revolution as incomplete and feel that its goals have not been achieved. That means that much time has been wasted because nothing much has been achieved. Therefore, those responsible for the time wasted must be held accountable and the obstacles to the unfinished revolution should be removed. Some groups are satisfied that Hosni Mubarak and his regime were removed. This group believes that toppling the Mubarak regime was a great achievement by itself. On the other hand, some believe that the revolution was staged against police oppression. So celebrating the revolution and victory over the police on the same day will mean that some groups do not acknowledge the revolution. The coincidence of marking the first anniversary of the January 25 revolution and the day the police were defeated on January 28 last year, has put Egyptians in a quandary. They do not know how to deal with the situation. I call this situation the “Acknowledgement Stalemate”. Who should acknowledge what? Should the army acknowledge the revolution? On February 11, the army took over the country right after the fall of Mubarak's regime. The revolutionaries and the army made a tacit agreement that the army would protect the revolution and the revolutionaries would support the army. But neither of them explained what the revolution meant for the army. What should the army protect and what should it not protect? Due to the absence of a concrete agreement between the two groups, problems emerged. The revolutionaries have become frustrated and the army has viewed such frustration as a denial of what it has done for the revolution. The absence of trust on both sides was clear in the latest violent clashes between them. The revolution in Egypt should be acknowledged because this is the only way to end animosity and contain public anger. To do this, the military should expedite the holding of the presidential election. The army should clearly show its support for the revolution and should, as a sign of respect, hold accountable those who have killed and injured thousands of Egyptians since January 25. The army should stop chasing prominent revolutionary figures under any pretext as people see this to be illogical. Taking these steps might be the best way to end the stalemate and give the military a graceful exit. Supporting the revolution will end the confusion and will immortalize the military in Egyptian history. __
