TURMOIL IN EGYPT

Yes, this week “turmoil” is the word yet again, and this time in the human political sphere; eighteen days of revolution in Egypt, a nation as populous as Germany and the most significant Arab nation in the Middle East. The “dethronement” of a dictator has been the result.

The two most extraordinary features of this revolution have been first, that it was effected by a leaderless people’s movement, and, second, that it took place with virtually no violence. The only violence to be seen was the response of the protestors to Mubarak’s attempt to keep power using violence through thugs, and when that attempt was defeated the protest continued peacefully. And it was certainly not a revolutionary “coup” by the army; neither did the army use force.

However, the fact that the country has not degenerated into political chaos is entirely due to this “third estate” (or perhaps we should say this “first estate”!), namely the army. The army, respected by the people, but being watched nervously, has filled a very dangerous power vacuum and is effectively ruling. It has a crucial stabilizing role.

The question now is, can a fundamentally authoritarian institution, the army, led by aged and senior leaders really find its way to establishing a people’s democratic rule of the kind being demanded by a much younger and freer generation. It will have to give birth to something alien to its own nature and culture. A second question is whether the behavioral restraints, courtesies and non violent toleration which actually make a democracy work are sufficiently implanted in Egyptian society. What will happen, for example, when the ardent Islamism of the “Brotherhood” comes face to face with those opting for secularism or even simply wanting tolerant recognition? Repression, not toleration, has been the culture for the last 30 years. A massive culture change (the most difficult of all changes) is demanded. A third question is where is the new political leadership for such a venture? There is very little evidence of it at the moment.
So the next phase is going to be as momentous (and probably much more difficult) than the first phase just completed.

A huge amount hangs on the outcome, and not just for Egypt. It is a vast challenge to the whole Arab world, where the prevailing political structures are of the despotic and oppressive Mubarak kind that has just been overthrown. Egypt is the pace maker here. Already the rulers of Saudi Arabia are nervous and other despots are beginning to bribe their people! Will this lead to new freedoms in the Middle East, or will it collapse back into a black hole of some worse tyranny? As the events have demonstrated the U.S. and the West are at a complete loss to know what quite to do!

The critical thing to do is to pray, not simply that God will bring these nations into new freedoms, but more particularly that these events will promote the spread of the gospel more widely and deeply throughout the Middle East. Christians have taken a terrible battering in Iran and Iraq in the last decade, and life has been anything but easy for them in Egypt, Saudi and all other countries in the Middle East. They very much need our prayer.



Bob

To make a comment: click on word “comments” below, write your comment in the white box which appears and add your name and e mail address (if you wish), choose “select profile”, click “anonymous” and then continue

TURMOIL CONTINUES

For some time now I have been impressed by the double nature of the judgements which are threatening the world. On the one hand is humanity’s destructive behaviour towards itself and on the other hand there is the hugely destructive potential of natural forces. Both of these, I believe, will show a frightening increase as this century proceeds. And my horizon can no longer remain the shores of our own nation; judgement is a world issue.

This last week has seen marked examples of these two forces; massive revolutionary demonstrations in Egypt (reflected in other parts of the Middle East), along with unprecedented natural catastrophes, especially in Australia and the Amazon. This week I’ll comment on the natural phenomena, next week the Middle East.

Only three weeks ago I wrote a column called “World in Turmoil” featuring the great Australian floods. Now we have seen in the same country the worst hurricane in living memory. Its eye was 20 miles across, its impact from was 400 miles across and it reach was some 600 miles inland. Winds reached 180 m.p.h. Mercifully it did less damage than anticipated in the larger towns in its path, but its devastation was huge. Australian courage and resolve have faced it but, of course, cannot lessen it. And this was a hurricane following rapidly after unprecedented floods.

Less known, but perhaps more frightening is the news from the Amazon forest area, the “lungs of the planet”, where in 2010 there has been catastrophic drought. This follows, and is worse than, a previous “one-in-a-hundred-year” drought in 2005. The Rio Negro, which is the biggest tributary to the Amazon, was at its lowest levels since records began at the start of the 20th century. In addition the dryness of the forests has made them susceptible to vast forest fires. All this means that a huge area of the world which has been absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere has begun to release CO2 into the atmosphere. Whereas the Amazon will normally soak up some 2 billion tones of CO2 annually, the 2005 drought released some 5 ½ billion tonnes into the atmosphere, which is equivalent to the annual CO2 emissions from the U.S.A. This is due to the vast numbers of dying and decaying tress and foliage. A Brazilian professor of Tropical Ecology commented; “The predicament of the Amazon and other major tropical forest regions has never been so uncertain”. The increasing climate instability is a factor that will not go away. We know enough science now to know the appalling consequences of such instability; global convulsions affecting world geography, populations, food and water.

A newspaper editorial said, “The world needs massive action, beginning immediately to reverse the existing trends on emissions and deforestation”. Correct! But it is simply most unlikely to happen; the prevailing selfishness and inadequacy of humanity being all too evident.

Three weeks ago I related these kinds of happenings to Jesus’ prophetic words about end-time catastrophes in the heavenly and natural spheres, reminding us they are not simply indicators of judgement but indicators of cosmic rebirth at his coming. One further thought arises in my mind; are the devastating catastrophes he spoke of likely to come “overnight” or will they build up in intensity over time? The sensible answer to that question would seem to be that the odds are even. Personally I would think a gradual build up more likely, but at a pace that was clearly discernable to anyone who had eyes to see and was watching, and a pace that increased with time. Beware! The pace is quickening.


Bob


To make a comment: click on word “comments” below, write your comment in the white box which appears and add your name and e mail address (if you wish), choose “select profile”, click “anonymous” and then continue

A CAUSE FOR OFFENCE

We all know of the Christian air stewardess who was suspended for wearing a cross whilst on duty. Some may even know of the council office worker who was told to remove her wedding ring whilst at work. Recently a Christian mental health worker was suspended by the NHS for sharing privately with her work colleagues Christian principles in connection with abortion advice. In the first and last of these cases re-instatement thankfully was made, but only through the intervention of a Christian Legal Agency.

In all three cases the real scandal was the charge preferred against these people: doing or saying things that “some people may find offensive”. One wonders what kind of person would find the sight of a woman’s wedding ring “offensive” – would it be some one who objects to life long vows of commitment? One has to retort that such stricture is itself an act that is grossly offensive..

This kind of arbitration, “because it might offend”, is based on incredibly shaky ground. It never ought to be at the bottom of any stricture. All it does is to give a handle for some people (one might say, slightly obsessive people) to abuse other people who have a different or opposite viewpoint. There is evidence of this across the world in accusations against Christians where they are in a minority. I seem to remember that the argument against the old British blasphemy laws was that there should be no law against non-religious opinion, and such opinion should not be treated as an offence. There was great outcry until these laws were rendered defunct. Now it seems a Christian stance is the new blasphemy in the sight of certain groups of people and the blasphemy law must be reinstated in a new guise to crush such a stance. Certainly there seems to be very little of the “live and let live” in these acts; they smack much more of intolerance, and that in an age which outwardly screams for tolerance as the supreme virtue.

The problem with making a ruling against something “that some people might find offensive” is of course that it is virtually impossible to make any objective decision as to what is or is not offensive. It is totally dependent upon some party proclaiming they have been offended. In such a situation it will always be the louder voice or the greater threat of retaliation that wins the day. A person of militant outlook will be the one who uses the ruling, and will always win against one of a more peaceful outlook. It is indeed exactly the situation in which real tolerance is most likely to disappear. It means a reversion to a “might is right” position.

Individual cases are always important, but there is a very far reaching case being courted at the level of the United Nations. Ironically enough there is a movement afoot to get a ruling which would stricture defamation of religion. It’s a blasphemy law in new clothes! It is based on precisely the same principle as the cases we have looked at above, namely that nothing must be allowed which offends. What happens, however, when one set of religious beliefs are “offensive” to another? And that is the reality world-wide! Once again the loudest voice wins, and the most violent cause overwhelms the peaceable cause. And that is happening in many Muslim dominated areas. If such a ruling is adopted by the U.N. we shall have militant groups using the legislation simply to persecute minorities. There has rarely been such a misleading and dangerous proposal.



Bob

To make a comment: click on word “comments” below, write your comment in the white box which appears and add your name and e mail address (if you wish), choose “select profile”, click “anonymous” and then continue.