2011年9月7日 星期三
Orphan Elephants 肯亞大象孤兒院的故事
source: National Geographic Magazine
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/09/orphan-elephants/siebert-text
Orphans No More
After the trauma of attack and loss comes healing—and a richer understanding of the emotions and intelligence of elephants.
By Charles Siebert
Photograph by Michael Nichols
Along the northern rim of Kenya's Nairobi National Park, a mysterious array of brightly colored wool blankets can be seen draped over the gnarled branches of some of the forest's upwardly braiding croton trees. Set against the region's otherwise drab browns and greens, the hanging blankets could be construed as remnants of some ancient tribal ritual—until shortly before five each evening, when their function as part of a new interspecies experiment becomes apparent.
Off in the distance a few upright figures in bright green coats and crumpled white safari hats appear, calling out names in trilling, high-pitched voices: "Kalama!" "Kitirua!" "Olare!" All at once baby elephants emerge from the brush, a straggled procession of 18 flap-eared brown heads, their long trunks steering their bulbous heft with a heavily hypnotic grace. They come to rest beneath the color-draped trees, where the keepers tie a blanket around each one for warmth before resuming the trek home.
Home is the Nairobi nursery of the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, the world's most successful orphan-elephant rescue and rehabilitation center. The nursery takes in orphan elephants from all over Kenya, many victims of poaching or human-wildlife conflict, and raises them until they are no longer milk dependent. Once healed and stabilized at the nursery, they are moved more than a hundred miles southeast to two holding centers in Tsavo National Park. There, at their own pace, which can be up to eight to ten years, they gradually make the transition back into the wild. The program is a cutting-edge experiment in cross-species empathy that only the worst extremes of human insensitivity could have necessitated.
These are sad and perilous days for the world's largest land animal. Once elephants roamed the Earth like waterless whales, plying ancient migratory routes ingrained in their prodigious memories. Now they've been backed into increasingly fragmented territories. When not being killed for their tusks or for bush meat, they are struggling against loss of habitat due to human population pressures and drought. A 1979 survey of African elephants estimated a population of about 1.3 million. About 500,000 remain. In Asia an estimated 40,000 are left in the wild. And yet even as the elephant population dwindles, the number of human-elephant conflicts rises. In Africa, reports of elephants and villagers coming into conflict with each other appear almost daily.
A recent arrival at the Nairobi nursery was an elephant named Murka, rescued near Tsavo National Park with a spear lodged deep between her eyes and gaping spear and axe wounds along her back and sides. The spear had penetrated ten inches, rupturing her sinuses, which prevented her from using her trunk to drink. Her deep wounds were filled with maggots. Most likely orphaned by poachers who killed her mother for profit, the one-year-old baby is believed to have been subsequently attacked by local Maasai tribesmen who were angry about losing their traditional grazing land to the park. A mobile vet unit was able to tranquilize her, clean her wounds, and extract the spear.
The plight of elephants has become so dire that their greatest enemy—humans—is also their only hope, a topsy-turvy reality that moved a woman named Daphne Sheldrick to establish the nursery back in 1987. Sheldrick is fourth-generation Kenya-born and has spent the better part of her life tending wild animals. Her husband was David Sheldrick, the renowned naturalist and founding warden of Tsavo East National Park who died of a heart attack in 1977. She's reared abandoned baby buffalo, dik-diks, impalas, zebras, warthogs, and black rhinos, among others, but no creature has beguiled her more than elephants.
Orphan infant elephants are a challenge to raise because they remain fully dependent on their mother's milk for the first two years of life and partially so until the age of four. In the decades the Sheldricks spent together in Tsavo, they never succeeded in raising an orphan younger than one because they couldn't find a formula that matched the nutritional qualities of a mother's milk. Aware that elephant milk is high in fat, they tried adding cream and butter to the mix, but found the babies had trouble digesting it and soon died. They then used a nonfat milk that the elephants could digest better, but eventually, after growing thinner and thinner on that formula, these orphans succumbed as well. Shortly before David's death, the couple finally arrived at a precise mixture of human baby formula and coconut. This kept alive a three-week-old orphan named Aisha, helping her grow stronger every day.
It was Aisha that revealed to Daphne another essential ingredient for raising an orphan elephant. When Daphne traveled to Nairobi to prepare for a daughter's wedding, she left Aisha, then six months old, in the care of an assistant. In the two weeks she was away, Aisha stopped eating and died, apparently overcome with grief at the loss of another mother. "When Aisha died, I realized the mistake I'd made," says Daphne, still pained by the memory. "She missed me too much. You mustn't let an elephant get too attached to one person. It was stupid of me to think I could do it without substituting a larger family. I mean, I knew wild elephants. I had watched the elephants in Tsavo my entire married life, so I should have known better. One just has to look at an elephant group to understand the importance of family. So we have to replace what the elephant would have in the wild."
Any wild elephant group is, in essence, one large and highly sensitive organism. Young elephants are raised within a matriarchal family of doting female caregivers, beginning with the birth mother and then branching out to include sisters, cousins, aunts, grandmothers, and established friends. These bonds endure over a life span that can be as long as 70 years. Young elephants stay close to their mothers and extended family members—males until they are about 14, females for life. When a calf is threatened or harmed, all the other elephants comfort and protect it.
This cohesiveness is enforced by a complex communication system. When close to each other, elephants employ a range of vocalizations, from low rumblings to high-pitched screams and trumpets, along with assorted visual signals. They express a range of emotions using their trunk, ears, head, and tail. When they need to communicate over longer distances, they use powerful low-frequency, rumbling calls that can be heard by others more than a mile away.
After a death, family members show signs of grief and exhibit ritualistic behavior. Field biologists such as Joyce Poole, who has studied Africa's elephants for more than 35 years, describe elephants trying to lift the dead body and covering it with dirt and brush. Poole once watched a female stand guard over her stillborn baby for three days, her head, ears, and trunk drooped in grief. Elephants may revisit the bones of the deceased for months, even years, touching them with their trunks and creating paths to visit the carcass.
What has amazed Sheldrick most since establishing the Nairobi nursery is how readily even severely traumatized babies begin to reweave the elaborate social fabric of the wild group. "They are born with a genetic memory and are extremely social animals," she says. "They intuitively know to be submissive before elders, and the females are instinctively maternal, even from a very young age. Whenever we get a new baby here, the others will come around and lovingly put their trunks on its back to comfort it. They have such big hearts."
Standing amid a group of orphans one afternoon as they browsed on croton tree branches, I was struck by their distinct personalities. Kalama, a female found at five weeks old in a water well in northern Samburu, was cheeky and playful. Kitirua, found abandoned at around 18 months old near a swamp in Amboseli National Park, was a recent arrival and still shy and aloof. Tano, a four-month-old suspected poaching victim from the Laikipia region of central Kenya, had become so close to the keepers that she kept pushing other orphans away out of jealousy. Yet another suspected poaching victim, Chemi Chemi, was a mischievous male elephant. "We call him al Qaeda," explained Edwin Lusichi, the nursery's head elephant keeper. "He's always shoving us and the other orphan elephants around."
It was as though I were hanging out with a group of precocious schoolkids vying to establish their standing and make an impression on the new kid on the playground. When I approached an achingly adorable two-month-old female named Sities, I soon found myself deposited in a nearby bush by the cracked-leather rump of another elephant, getting a parting stomp on my foot for good measure.
"That's Olare," Lusichi called out, gesturing toward the one-year-old that had just put me in my place. "She's practicing to be a matriarch."
When it was time to head toward the nursery stables, I positioned myself along one flank of the pachyderm procession. I'd started off toward the trees of blankets, when an elephant trunk suddenly struck my midsection with such force that I dropped to my knees.
"I forgot to warn you," Lusichi said, helping me up with a broad smile. "Tumaren doesn't like it when anyone walks ahead of her."
Spend enough time around elephants and it's difficult not to anthropomorphize their behavior. "Elephants are very human animals," says Sheldrick, sitting one afternoon on the back porch of her house at the edge of the nursery grounds, the wide, acacia-dotted plains of Nairobi National Park sprawling in the distance. "Their emotions are exactly the same as ours. They've lost their families, have seen their mothers slaughtered, and they come here filled with aggression—devastated, broken, and grieving. They suffer from nightmares and sleeplessness."
What makes this particular moment in the fraught history of elephant-human relations so remarkable is that the long-accrued anecdotal evidence of the elephant's extraordinary intelligence is being borne out by science. Studies show that structures in the elephant brain are strikingly similar to those in humans. MRI scans of an elephant's brain suggest a large hippocampus, the component in the mammalian brain linked to memory and an important part of its limbic system, which is involved in processing emotions. The elephant brain has also been shown to possess an abundance of the specialized neurons known as spindle cells, which are thought to be associated with self-awareness, empathy, and social awareness in humans. Elephants have even passed the mirror test of self-recognition, something only humans, and some great apes and dolphins, had been known to do.
This common neurobiology has prompted some scientists to explore whether young elephants that have experienced assaults on their psyches may be exhibiting signs of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), just like orphaned children in the wake of war or genocide. Gay Bradshaw, a psychologist and the director of the Kerulos Center in Oregon, has brought the latest insights from human neuroscience and psychology to bear on startling field observations of elephant behavior. She suspects that some threatened elephant populations might be suffering from chronic stress and trauma brought on by human encroachment and killing.
Before the international ivory trade ban in 1989, poaching took a steep toll on many elephant populations and in some instances significantly altered their social structure because poachers tended to target older elephants. Field biologists found that the number of older matriarchs, female caregivers, and bulls in vulnerable groups had fallen drastically. In Uganda, for instance, one study reported that many females between the ages of 15 and 25 had no close family members whatsoever.
In the decades since the ban, some populations have stabilized, though most elephants remain threatened by human encroachment. As poaching has flared up in the past five years in the Congo Basin and large swaths of central and eastern Africa, many elephant families there have lost most of their adult females. Where such social upheaval exists, calves are being raised by ever more inexperienced females. An increasing number of young orphaned elephants, many of which have witnessed the death of a parent through culling or at the hands of poachers, are coming of age in the absence of the traditional support system. "The loss of older elephants," says Bradshaw, "and the extreme psychological and physical trauma of witnessing the massacres of their family members interferes with a young elephant's normal development."
Bradshaw speculates that this early trauma, combined with the breakdown in social structure, may account for some instances of aberrant elephant behavior that have been reported by field biologists. Between 1992 and 1997, for example, young male elephants in Pilanesberg Game Reserve in South Africa killed more than 40 rhinoceroses—an unusual level of aggression—and in some cases had attempted to mount them. The young elephants were adolescent males that had witnessed their families being shot in cullings at Kruger National Park—sanctioned killings to keep elephant populations under control. At that time it was common practice for such orphaned elephant babies to be tethered to the bodies of their dead relatives until they could be rounded up for translocation to new territories. Once moved to Pilanesberg, the orphans matured without the support of any adult males. "Young males often follow older, sexually active males around," says Joyce Poole, "appearing to study what they do. These youngsters had no such role models."
For Allan Schore, an expert on human trauma disorders at UCLA who has co-authored papers with Bradshaw, the behavior of these elephants conforms to a diagnosis of PTSD in humans. "A large body of research shows that the neurobiological mechanisms of attachment are found in many mammals, including humans and elephants," he explains. "The emotional relationship between the mother and her offspring impacts the wiring of the infants' developing brain. When early experiences are traumatic, there is a thinning down of the developing brain circuits, especially in areas that process emotional information and regulate stress. That means less resilience and an enduring deficit in aggression regulation, social communication, and empathy."
One effort to repair the torn fabric of an elephant group lends further support to the idea that early trauma and a lack of role models can lead to aggression: After Joyce Poole suggested that park rangers in South Africa introduce six older bull elephants into Pilanesberg's population of about 85 elephants, the aberrant behavior of the marauding adolescent males—and their premature hormonal changes—abruptly stopped.
If elephants can wound like us, they can heal like us as well, perhaps more readily. With humans acting as stand-ins for their mothers, along with the help of the other nursery elephants, the majority of the orphans that survive recover to become fully functional wild elephants again. To date, Sheldrick's nursery has successfully raised more than a hundred orphan elephants. They have returned to the wild in wary, halting, half measures at first, having become "homo-pachyderms," caught between a deep devotion to their human caregivers and the irresistible call of their true selves.
One evening during the dry season a huge group of wild elephants emerged from the bush to drink at the water trough at the Ithumba compound in Tsavo, one of two locations where the orphans transition to the wild. There were 25 to 30 elephants—massive, long-tusked bulls and matriarchs, adolescent males and females, some ex-orphans, and several newborn calves. Directly alongside the trough were the open-air stockades where the Ithumba orphans had already gathered for the night, staring over at their wild counterparts, which, between sips, stared back. The keepers and I were standing no more than 30 yards from the wild group, much closer than one usually would get. And the elephants were much closer to humans than wild ones normally venture. The dreamlike scene was dictated by the presence of the orphans and their conversations with the wild group. "They have let the wild ones know it is OK," explained Benjamin Kyalo, Ithumba's head elephant keeper. "The word is clearly being spread around Tsavo: Good humans. Good water. Let's go!"
By day the keepers lead the orphans into the bush to browse. They deliver midday bottles of formula at a designated mud-bath venue. When a cluster of wild elephant heads appears in the distance, the keepers keep the milk-dependent orphans close, not allowing them to leave with the group. But by the age of five or seven, the orphans may go off with the wild ones. Some will stay out for a few nights before returning to the stockades, as though they'd been away at a sleepover. Some will go for good, becoming full-fledged members of their own wild families.
One orphan named Loijuk was so eager to join a wild group that she twice opened the Ithumba gate with her trunk and let herself out. Months after the second breakout she had become a member of a wild ex-orphan group. Another precocious orphan named Irima was just over three years old and still milk dependent when he insinuated himself into a wild group near Voi, the other stockade where orphans are introduced to the wild. After five days the Voi keepers heard a series of frantic, high-pitched elephant trumpets coming from the direction of an electrified fence. "Irima must have told the group that he still needed his milk and orphan family and wanted to go back, so Edo [a former orphan] escorted him home," Voi's head keeper, Joseph Sauni, recalls. "The keepers opened the gate, and Edo escorted Irima all the way back to the stockades. Edo drank some water from the well, ate some food, and took off again. Mission accomplished."
Even fully "repatriated" orphans like Edo will return to the stockades to visit their human family. In December 2008 Emily, a matriarch that had been brought to the Nairobi nursery in 1993, showed up at the Voi stockades one afternoon with her group and a surprise guest. "She'd given birth the day before, about a mile away," says Sauni. "She led the baby here to show us her newborn. We named her Eve."
Back at the Nairobi nursery the baby elephants return for their six o'clock feeding, breaking into a full sprint once they see the line of keepers holding up huge bottles of milk before each of the stables. A major ruckus ensues when they arrive—some stable assignments have changed to make room for a new arrival, and elephants hate alterations to their routine. The nursery's most veteran keeper, Mishak Nzimbi—known as the "elephant whisperer" and the clear favorite of all the orphans—steps into the fray. Heeding little more than an upheld hand and one stern utterance, the residents settle into place, sucking down gallons of formula in seconds.
"The control the keepers have over these elephants, without even a stick or anything!" marvels Daphne's younger daughter, Angela, the current executive director of the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust. "It all stems from the elephants' desire to please someone they love. It's amazing and beautiful to see. With elephants you reap what you sow, and the way you get the most out of them is through love."
We walk over to the stable marked Murka—the orphan that had been found with a spear lodged in her head. "Now look at her," Daphne says, as Murka, with only the slightest indent in her forehead to show for her brutal ordeal, approaches the half-opened door of her stable and takes two of my fingers to suckle on. "The vets didn't expect her to make it through the first night."
"And she's healed psychologically," Angela adds. "She was one extremely traumatized little elephant when she first woke up, lashing out at everyone—and rightly so. But slowly she began to trust again, and after about a month she wasn't just fine about people, she was seeking them out. And it wasn't just our doing. She would never have recovered so quickly without the input of other elephants."
All around us orphans and keepers are settling in for the night. Each elephant sleeps with a different keeper every night to prevent it from getting too attached to a particular person—and perhaps vice versa. Leaning on the stable door, Nzimbi, Murka's overseer for the night, recalls first visiting the nursery 22 years earlier. He immediately asked Daphne for a job. "I understand these animals," he says. "I love them so much."
Directly above Murka's straw-and-blanket bed is Nzimbi's bunk, with a small radio perched by his pillow. I ask if he has an alarm clock to wake him for the elephants' feedings.
"Oh no," he says. "Every three hours you feel a trunk reach up and pull your blankets off. The elephants are our alarms."
2011年4月17日 星期日
Children of Conflict
Source:
Al Jazeera
13 Mar 2007 12:01 GMT http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/general/2007/02/2008525183938868834.html
Around the world, millions of children are the unheard voices of war. And the horrors they witness today will inform the adults they become tomorrow. Will they grow up to be the next leaders, teachers, freedom fighters or terrorists?
Children of Conflict is a four-part series which explores the lives of children whose lives are blighted by growing up in conflict zones. Nadene Ghouri goes in search of what the past has created and what the future holds for these young people.
She travels to Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Lebanon but begins her journey in Gaza, where she meets children growing up in an environment of frequent violence and constant economic depression.
PART ONE: Gaza
14 year old Fatima
One of the World's biggest news stories, in one of the smallest and most claustrophobic strips of land on earth. Gaza is a virtual prison with no way in and hardly any way out.
In an exclusive story, we talk to the grandchildren of Fatima Al Najar – the oldest female Palestinian suicide bomber. Bewildered and grieving for their grandmother, the children say all they want to do is to follow suit and become 'martyrs' themselves.
13 year old Rana
"I want to do the same. And I will recruit the other children of this town for martyrdom," says 14 year old Fatima. When she grows up she wants to study chemistry and engineering at university. "That's if I don't become a martyr first," she says.
Her views are contrasted with another girl, 13 year old Rana, who dreams of being a journalist "so I can tell people how we suffer here. I am a child, I know what death means, I know what war means, I know what blood means. Me and all the children here know what it means".
10 year old Tehal
Or Tehal, just 10 years old – and who wants to be the first female Palestinian president.
Her three wishes? To clean up the mess left behind by Israeli bulldozers, to give children their rights "because they have no rights here" and finally, "to build a new Gaza".
PART TWO: Lebanon
The town of Qana
The town of Qana has become synonomous with Lebanon's tragedy. Believed to be the site where Jesus performed his first miracle of turning water into wine, the town has earned infamy for two massacres of children 10 years apart. The first attack came in 1996, when Israel bombed a UN base sheltering 800 people – most of them children. Over 100 children were killed or maimed.
The second massacre was during last year's war on Lebanon. A rocket hit a house where several families had taken shelter in the basement. It collapsed – burying the children in rubble. Seventeen were killed. The images of children being carried from the rubble, looking as though they were sleeping, horrified the world.
Hussein Belhas 13 years old- survived an Israeli attack in 1996
The film goes back to find the survivors of the first massacre - now teenagers – to find that although most of them have rebuilt their lives, last summer's slaughter devastated them emotionally. And there are extraordinary parallels between the two stories.
In 1996, three year old Hussein Belhas was believed dead, and was put in a morgue freezer. Remarkably, he was discovered alive and was rescued. Now 13, a composed Hussein says: "I am the boy who died, and then came back to life. This was my destiny." Still suffering horribly from his injuries (his leg was blown off at the kneecap and has grown back as a twisted stick), Hussein will require medical treatment for the rest of his life: "When I try to play football, it hurts me. I stay awake all night with the pain."
Hasan Shalhoub 4 years old - survived an Israeli attack in 2006
His truly incredible story sits alongside that of Hasan Shalhoub, just four years old. In the massacre of 2006, Hasan lost his sister Zeinab, who was seven. Also believed dead, Hasan was left over-night in a makeshift morgue. "In the morning I woke up. I started talking to a little girl next to me, but she turned out to be dead. Then I asked for my mother."
Too young to fully realise the extent of his dramatic escape, Hasan says: "I was only injured a little bit in my head. I am fine now."
PART THREE: Afghanistan
Children scavaging in the dump for something to sell
Afghanistan is said to be the land where God only comes to weep. A place of wild beauty and extreme cruelty, it seems never to have known peace.
After the civil war of the 1980s, two-thirds of the population were either dead or refugees. And after the curse of the Taliban, a new hopelessness descended on the country.
Although Afghan children don't know why any of these wars happened, they know they have been born into a devastated land.
Victim of an unexploded mine
Misery, poverty, cold and never-ending internal conflict - this is their lot. The film looks at the many ways children are compelled to work in order to help their families to survive, and at the terrible conditions they are forced to endure.
Few play activities for children exist, and with no sewage or drainage system in Kabul (population 3.5m), many of their play areas double as open-air toilets.
The orphanage
Signs of war damage abound, and the hospitals bear witness to the daily admission of children maimed by the unexploded ordnance which has littered the fields and valleys of Afghanistan for decades.
The orphanage outside Kabul provides food and shelter for the parentless kids, and though there's no future to look forward to, at least it's warm.
PART FOUR: Democratic Republic of Congo
The film goes inside the minds of the Congolese child soldiers. What makes an 11 year old child capable of awful brutality? "I saw my father die, then they killed my aunt. I didn't want to die by machete at home. That's a pointless death. So I decided to join the militia," says 13 year old Eric.
Child soldiers marching
Responsible for the killings of thousands of innocent lives, the feared child militias of the DRC tell how their childhood was lost. Victims of a war no one understands, brutalised by their commanders who turned them into armed brigands, the children became murderers and rapists in a "kill or be killed" conflict.
For some there is hope. Fourteen year old Jolie describes how she preferred a machete to a gun in battle: "A gun can run out of bullets. A machete is safer if you want to stay alive." She calmly recalls how she first killed a man: "I hacked off his head and hands."
Commanders turn the children into armed brigands
But now she has changed her view. Holding her new baby in her arms she says: "This child will never join a militia. His father was killed in battle. And I saw too much suffering myself. What was it for? Nothing."
For others, like Eric, there is no way back to the normal world. Unable to tell his parents the truth about those he killed and unwelcome in his village he says: "At home I am nothing, but in the militia I had power and money. I want to go back to the bush."
2011年3月25日 星期五
如何分辨「好阿拉伯人」與「壞阿拉伯人」
轉貼來源:台灣立報 2011-3-24
http://www.lihpao.com/?action-viewnews-itemid-105573
編按
自從2011年2月以來,源自利比亞東部的反抗軍與強人格達費上校的忠誠部隊衝突四起。在突尼西亞的班阿里和埃及的穆巴拉克兩位獨裁者被迫下台之後,格達費是否也將步上同樣的命運?目前發生在利比亞的事件,是否就是突尼西亞和埃及人民抗爭的翻版?如何理解格達費的奇詭行徑以及他在政治上的轉變?為何以美、英、法為首的「北大西洋公約組織」要對利比亞開戰?如何解釋或分辨「好阿拉伯人」與「壞阿拉伯人」之間的差異?
在利比亞戰火蔓延之際,《新國際》特別翻譯比利時合作媒體「調查行動」(Ivesstig'Action)網絡的這篇訪談稿。本文受訪者莫哈梅德.哈珊(Mohamed Hassan)生於非洲衣索比亞,是當今國際知名的阿拉伯世界地緣政治專家。他在1970年代即即活躍於衣索比亞社會主義革命的學生陣線,1990年代之間曾以外交官身分派駐華盛頓、北京和布魯塞爾。他的著作主要集中在處理阿拉伯民族主義和伊斯蘭運動的問題。
問:繼突尼西亞和埃及之後,阿拉伯世界的革命是否同樣會發生在利比亞?
答:目前發生在利比亞的狀況有點不同。在突尼西亞和埃及,人民的自由受到剝奪是顯而易見的,但是,真正促使年輕人走上街頭反抗的,是貧困落後的社會條件。這兩個國家的人民幾乎看不到未來。
在利比亞,格達費政權的確有貪瀆的狀況,壟斷國家大部份的財富,對於人民的抗爭也常施以嚴酷鎮壓。不過,利比亞的社會條件比起鄰國要好多了。利比亞平均壽命比起非洲其他國家都要來得高,醫療和教育體系都很上軌道。它也是非洲最早根除瘧疾的國家之一。即使其財富的分配還是相當不平等,但是國民平均所得達到1萬1千美元,是阿拉伯世界中最高的國家之一。因此,你在利比亞找不到導致類似突尼西亞和埃及人民起義的客觀條件。
墳場的和平
問:那麼,如何解釋利比亞正在發生的狀況?
答:要了解當下的事件,必須回歸到歷史的脈絡。利比亞曾經是奧圖曼帝國的一個行省。1830年,法國拿下了阿爾及利亞,而同樣受制於奧圖曼帝國的埃及,其埃及總督莫哈梅德.阿里(Mohamed Ali)則採取越來越為獨立的政策。奧圖曼當局擔心從此喪失整個地區的控制權,於是派軍進入利比亞。
那個時代,瑟努西斯教派(Senoussis)在當地非常有影響力。這個教派由一個名叫薩義德.莫罕米德(Sayid Mohammed)的阿爾及利亞人創立,他在遊學阿爾及利亞和摩洛哥後,來到突尼西亞和利比亞宣講他獨特的伊斯蘭教義。19世紀初期,瑟努西斯教派信眾越來越多,但由於他在宣教中批評奧圖曼的權威教派,並不受當局歡迎。於是他遷往埃及和麥加地區發展。但後來他還是決定潛回利比亞,在東部的席雷奈格(Cyrénaïque)地區生根,建立地盤。
他的教派在這個地區發展很快。他在那兒徵稅、調解部落間的紛爭,深入到民間的生活。後來,甚至擁有自己的軍隊,為商旅篷車提供保鑣護衛的服務。最後,瑟努西斯教派其實就變成席雷奈格的地方政府,其影響力甚至遠達查德北部。不過,歐洲殖民強權很快就大舉進入非洲,將南撒哈拉的部分與大陸切割。這當然很不利於瑟努西斯教派的發展,而義大利的入侵利比亞也撼動了這個教派原有的霸權地位。
問:關於殖民罪行,義大利曾經在2008年給付利比亞一筆補償金。當時的殖民政權真的那麼恐怖嗎?或者是因為義大利總理貝魯斯柯尼另有盤算,想要討好格達費以便簽訂利潤更為龐大的商貿協議?
答:義大利的殖民政策的確相當酷殘。20世紀初,有一個法西斯團體開始發動宣傳,主張在黑色大陸上應該積極建立白人的至高優先權。尤其是義大利於1896年的阿杜亞(Adoua)戰役受挫於衣索比亞部隊之後,重建白人霸權的欲望大張,認為文明大國的榮譽已被野蠻人玷污,必須要用鮮血來清洗。法西斯的宣傳認定利比亞是一個野蠻國家,其居民是落後的遊牧民族,然則,其風景又彷如明信片那麼漂亮,是一個很適合義大利人攻占的美好領地。
義大利入侵利比亞引發土耳其的不滿,兩國於1911年開戰。這是一場非常血腥的戰爭,最後是義大利於翌年大獲全勝。不過義大利也只能控制地中海沿岸的黎波里的地區,其他地方的反抗依然不斷,尤其是席雷奈格這個地區。瑟努西斯教派在這裡支持一支由阿爾默克塔(Omar Al-Mokhtar)領導的游擊部隊,這個游擊隊藏身山裡,十分厲害。儘管義大利軍隊的裝備和人馬都佔了優勢,卻還是常常被游擊隊突擊,損失重大。
然則,到了1930年代,墨索里尼在義大利當家,他採取極端政策根除抵抗,在利比亞的鎮壓變得十分兇暴,其中一個大屠夫就是葛拉季安尼將軍(Rodolf Graziani)。他曾經寫道:「義大利士兵深信他們揹負著一個文明而高貴的使命,他們必須不計代價完成這個使命……如果利比亞人不肯認命,不接受上天的安排,那麼,我們義大利人就必須持續作戰,也許必須將利比亞人民完全消滅才能夠取得和平,墳場的和平……」
2008年貝魯斯柯尼總理為這些殖民罪行補償利比亞。這當然是經過算計的策略:貝魯斯柯尼想要討好格達費以便尋求進一步的經濟合作。不管怎樣,利比亞人民的確深受殖民之害,即使要說是族群滅絕也不為過。
國王就是傀儡
問:利比亞後來是如何獨立的?
答:當義大利殖民者鎮壓席雷奈格地區的反抗時,瑟努西斯教派的領導人伊德里斯(Idrss)逃亡到埃及,在埃及和英國當局談判。第二次世界大戰之後,歐洲的殖民帝國一個個瓦解,而利比亞也在1951年獨立。在英國的支持之下,伊德里斯取得政權。然而,利比亞有一部分中產階級人士受到源自開羅的阿拉伯民族主義影響,希望利比亞能夠併入埃及,成就一個北非大國。可是,西方帝國主義強權不願意看到發展出一個阿拉伯大國,他們選擇支持利比亞獨立並扶植伊德里斯做為傀儡。
問:那麼,伊德里斯國王完全符合他們的期待嗎?
答:完全符合。獨立之後,組成利比亞的3個地區──的黎波里(Tripolitaine)、斐棧(Fezzan)和席雷奈格( Cyrénaïque)統合在一個聯邦體制下。可是,要知道,利比亞的領土3倍於法國,由於基礎建設欠缺,各個地域的界線其實很難認定,一直等到有航空器進行測量後,分界才比較明朗。1951年獨立時,利比亞人口約莫只有1百萬人。3個新近統合的地區,其歷史、文化的差異相當大。這個國家也根本沒有公路可以讓3個地區相通互連。因此,獨立初期的利比亞實質上還處於相當落後的階段,根本稱不上是一個真正的國家。
問:關於這個狀態,可否請你進一步說明?
答:「民族國家」是一個跟資產階級和資本主義的出現緊緊扣連的概念。在歐洲中世紀期間,資產階級希望他們的商貿活動可以擴展得越廣越好,可是卻被封建制度的種種限制給束縛了。每一個地方都被切割成無數的小小封建領土,商人貨物的輸送必須經過層層關卡,一次又一次地被扣稅被剝皮。這還不包括他們必須向每一個封建領主奉獻的禮品采金。所有這些路障都在資產階級革命之後打通了,民族國家也從而建立起來,允許商品在一個國家之內的龐大市場自由流通。
可是利比亞是在前資本主義階段被創建出來的。它的基礎建設嚴重欠缺,絕大部分的人民還是過著遊牧生活,根本難以管控,而社會中的分歧依然相當巨大,奴隸制度依然存在……此外,伊德里斯國王腦袋中根本沒有任何國家發展計畫,他完完全全依賴美國和英國的援助。
問:英國和美國為什麼要支持他?為了石油嗎?
答:在1951年,利比亞還沒有發現石油。但是英、美在利比亞境內有軍事基地,戰略上控制紅海和地中海。直到1954年,才有一個來自德州的大富豪韓特(Nelson Bunker Hunt)發現了利比亞的石油。當時,利比亞每桶石油的價碼只有阿拉伯地區石油的3分之1,可見這個國家是如何落後。當時,可以說是非洲最最貧困的一個國家。
革命泛阿拉伯主義
問:石油畢竟帶來了龐大收入,這些錢是怎麼使用的?
答:伊德里斯國王和他的集團,瑟努西斯教派核心人士靠著石油發家致富。他們也把一部分的石油收入分給其他部落的頭人,以緩和彼此的緊張關係。一小部分菁英靠著石油買賣也積累了一些財富,基礎建設開始有了一些投入,不過主要都集中在地中海沿岸,這是和外界做生意最受矚目的地帶。但是利比亞內地鄉野地區還是處於極端貧困的狀態,無數的窮人來到城市求生,集聚在都會邊緣的貧民窟。這樣的景況持續到1969年,3名軍官起來推翻了國王,其中一人就是格達費。
問:為何革命來自於軍隊中的軍官?
答:在一個部族分歧如此巨大的國家,軍隊其實就是唯一的國家體制。要不是有軍隊,利比亞這個國家根本就不算存在。除此之外,伊德里斯國王所屬的瑟努西斯集團也擁有他們自己的民兵。可是在國家軍隊,來自不同地區的年輕人可以在這裡交會,認識彼此。
格達費原先是參加一個服膺納塞主義的政治團體,可是他清楚這樣一個組合並不足以推翻王朝,於是決定入伍參軍。拉下伊德里斯國王的3名軍官都深深受到納塞的影響。其實納塞本身也是以埃及軍官的身分推翻法儒克(Farouk)國王。納塞受到社會主義的啟發,反對新殖民主義強權介入第三世界國家內政,主張阿拉伯世界大聯合。他上台後甚至將原本被英、法控制的蘇彝士運河收歸國有,這個舉動激怒了西方國家,導致1956年對埃及的轟炸。納塞的「革命泛阿拉伯主義」對於利比亞有相當大的迴響,尤其是在軍隊當中,格達費當然也是其中之一。利比亞軍官1969年所發動的政變基本上就是跟隨納塞的腳步。
問:利比亞革命帶來什麼改變?
答:格達費當時可以有兩個選擇。其一是將利比亞石油交給西方財團,就如同伊德里斯國王所做的一樣。那麼,利比亞就可能變成波斯灣地區的石油王國一樣,奴隸制度繼續存在,婦女被剝奪一切權利,而歐洲的那些所謂建築大師可以前來大顯身手,而天文數字般的預算則是來自阿拉伯人民口袋。或者,自主走上另一條獨立於新殖民強權的道路。格達費選擇了第二個選項,他將利比亞石油國有化。這當然也激怒了虎視眈眈的帝國主義者。
1950年代,在艾森豪總統時期的白宮流傳著一個笑話,這個笑話到了雷根總統時期發展為貨真價實的政治理論。你要如何辨別「好的阿拉伯人」和「壞的阿拉伯人」?答案是:一個好的阿拉伯人就是,美國說什麼,他就做什麼,於是,他會得到飛機做為回報,他可以把錢存到瑞士的銀行,可以被邀請到華盛頓作客等等。艾森豪和雷根都有屬於他們的好阿拉伯人,譬如,沙烏地阿拉伯和約旦的國王、科威特的親王、伊朗王室的首腦以及摩洛哥國王等,當然,別忘了利比亞的伊德里斯國王。至於壞的阿拉伯人,是哪些呢?那些不聽話的,譬如納塞、格達費,乃至稍後的海珊……

■利比亞東部大城班加西的一處牆上,塗鴉著格達費的肖像,圖攝於23日。(圖文/路透)
石油反革命
問:不過,格達費似乎不太……
答:格達費把槍口朝向群眾,這當然是有爭議的。不過,在沙烏地阿拉伯,在巴林,他們同樣對群眾開槍,而這些國家的領導人得到西方的一切讚許。對美國來說,格達費是一個壞阿拉伯人,因為他把石油國有化,而在1969年革命之前,西方石油集團根本上是把利比亞石油視為他們的囊中物。因為有石油收入的挹注,格達費為利比亞帶來了一些正面的改變,包括基礎建設、教育、醫療以及婦女的生活條件等等。
問:好吧,格達費推翻了王朝,將石油國有化,反對帝國強權,也為利比亞帶來正面改變。可是,在他當權40年之後,他畢竟是一個貪瀆的獨裁者,鎮壓反對的聲音,並且重新開門迎接西方大財團。你要怎麼解釋這些轉變?
答:剛開始的時候,格達費站在反對殖民強權的立場,並且慷慨支持世界上其他地方的解放運動,我很肯定他當年的作為。不過,要說清楚的是:格達費其實是反共的。1971年,他派人劫持了一輛載著蘇丹共產黨反對派人士的飛機,迫使其改變航道飛返蘇丹,這些人隨即被蘇丹總統尼梅黎(Nimeyri)處決。
事實上,格達費從來就不是一個有廣闊視野的政治家。他的革命是一場中產階級民族主義的革命,他是用國家資本主義在統治利比亞。要瞭解他的政權為何越走越偏,我們必須分析一些對他不利的因素,也要深入了解他個人所犯的錯誤。
首先,我們要知道,格達費剛接手的利比亞幾乎是一無所有,這個國家十分落後,根本沒有什麼受過教育的群眾或者強大的工人階級來支持革命。大部分受過良好教育的人都是屬於菁英階層,他們只會把利比亞的財富捧去奉送給新殖民強權。當然,這些人不會支持革命,他們當中有相當大部分的人乾脆就離開利比亞,到國外組織反對團體。
此外,推翻伊德里斯國王的軍官都深受納塞影響,埃及和利比亞原本是要計畫要連結成戰略上的夥伴關係。可是,1970年納塞逝世,整個計劃化為烏有。埃及從此變成一個反革命的國家,選擇向西方靠攏。埃及新總統沙達特親近美國,傾向自由市場經濟,並與以色列結盟。1977年,利比亞和埃及之間甚至爆發短暫衝突。想想看格達費的處境:一個曾經啟發他的國家,一個他曾經要緊密連結的國家,突然之間,變成他的敵人。
另一個對利比亞革命造成不利影響的重要因素是:1980年代石油價格大幅滑落。1973年,在以色列與周邊阿拉伯國家爆發戰爭的時候,幾個石油生產國決定採取禁運政策,造成油價急速攀升。此次禁運首度造成北方國家的財富往南方國家轉移。可是,到了1980年代,一個由雷根總統聯合沙烏地阿拉伯主導的「石油反革命」發生了,沙烏地阿拉伯大量增產,淹沒了整個石油市場,導致油價急速滑落。每桶石油的價格從35美元一下子摔到了8美元。
■利比亞的Al-Sedr儲油庫位在拉斯拉努夫鎮(Ras Lanuf)與賈瓦德鎮(Bin Jawad)之間,9日被支持格達費的軍隊所炸毀。(圖文/路透)
問:沙烏地阿拉伯豈不是搬石頭砸自己的腳?
答:對於他們的經濟當然不利。但是石油並不是沙烏地阿拉伯最重要的東西。最重要的是它與美國的關係。因為只有美國的支持才能維繫沙烏地阿拉伯王朝於不墜。
油價遽降對其他產油國而言是一場大災難,導致債台高築。而這一事件就發生在格達費掌權10年之後。他原本一無所有,如今可以用來進行建設的唯一財源又眼看著如同雪片在太陽下蒸發。
還要注意的是,這一波「石油反革命」也加速了蘇聯解體,導致它深陷於阿富汗戰爭而無以自拔。隨著蘇維埃集團的瓦解,利比亞失去了它最主要的政治支持者,在國際舞台上完全被孤立。而雷根政府把利比亞列入恐怖主義國家的黑名單,緊接著發動一系列的制裁行動,這讓利比亞更加難以喘息。
http://www.lihpao.com/?action-viewnews-itemid-105573
編按
自從2011年2月以來,源自利比亞東部的反抗軍與強人格達費上校的忠誠部隊衝突四起。在突尼西亞的班阿里和埃及的穆巴拉克兩位獨裁者被迫下台之後,格達費是否也將步上同樣的命運?目前發生在利比亞的事件,是否就是突尼西亞和埃及人民抗爭的翻版?如何理解格達費的奇詭行徑以及他在政治上的轉變?為何以美、英、法為首的「北大西洋公約組織」要對利比亞開戰?如何解釋或分辨「好阿拉伯人」與「壞阿拉伯人」之間的差異?
在利比亞戰火蔓延之際,《新國際》特別翻譯比利時合作媒體「調查行動」(Ivesstig'Action)網絡的這篇訪談稿。本文受訪者莫哈梅德.哈珊(Mohamed Hassan)生於非洲衣索比亞,是當今國際知名的阿拉伯世界地緣政治專家。他在1970年代即即活躍於衣索比亞社會主義革命的學生陣線,1990年代之間曾以外交官身分派駐華盛頓、北京和布魯塞爾。他的著作主要集中在處理阿拉伯民族主義和伊斯蘭運動的問題。
問:繼突尼西亞和埃及之後,阿拉伯世界的革命是否同樣會發生在利比亞?
答:目前發生在利比亞的狀況有點不同。在突尼西亞和埃及,人民的自由受到剝奪是顯而易見的,但是,真正促使年輕人走上街頭反抗的,是貧困落後的社會條件。這兩個國家的人民幾乎看不到未來。
在利比亞,格達費政權的確有貪瀆的狀況,壟斷國家大部份的財富,對於人民的抗爭也常施以嚴酷鎮壓。不過,利比亞的社會條件比起鄰國要好多了。利比亞平均壽命比起非洲其他國家都要來得高,醫療和教育體系都很上軌道。它也是非洲最早根除瘧疾的國家之一。即使其財富的分配還是相當不平等,但是國民平均所得達到1萬1千美元,是阿拉伯世界中最高的國家之一。因此,你在利比亞找不到導致類似突尼西亞和埃及人民起義的客觀條件。
墳場的和平
問:那麼,如何解釋利比亞正在發生的狀況?
答:要了解當下的事件,必須回歸到歷史的脈絡。利比亞曾經是奧圖曼帝國的一個行省。1830年,法國拿下了阿爾及利亞,而同樣受制於奧圖曼帝國的埃及,其埃及總督莫哈梅德.阿里(Mohamed Ali)則採取越來越為獨立的政策。奧圖曼當局擔心從此喪失整個地區的控制權,於是派軍進入利比亞。
那個時代,瑟努西斯教派(Senoussis)在當地非常有影響力。這個教派由一個名叫薩義德.莫罕米德(Sayid Mohammed)的阿爾及利亞人創立,他在遊學阿爾及利亞和摩洛哥後,來到突尼西亞和利比亞宣講他獨特的伊斯蘭教義。19世紀初期,瑟努西斯教派信眾越來越多,但由於他在宣教中批評奧圖曼的權威教派,並不受當局歡迎。於是他遷往埃及和麥加地區發展。但後來他還是決定潛回利比亞,在東部的席雷奈格(Cyrénaïque)地區生根,建立地盤。
他的教派在這個地區發展很快。他在那兒徵稅、調解部落間的紛爭,深入到民間的生活。後來,甚至擁有自己的軍隊,為商旅篷車提供保鑣護衛的服務。最後,瑟努西斯教派其實就變成席雷奈格的地方政府,其影響力甚至遠達查德北部。不過,歐洲殖民強權很快就大舉進入非洲,將南撒哈拉的部分與大陸切割。這當然很不利於瑟努西斯教派的發展,而義大利的入侵利比亞也撼動了這個教派原有的霸權地位。
問:關於殖民罪行,義大利曾經在2008年給付利比亞一筆補償金。當時的殖民政權真的那麼恐怖嗎?或者是因為義大利總理貝魯斯柯尼另有盤算,想要討好格達費以便簽訂利潤更為龐大的商貿協議?
答:義大利的殖民政策的確相當酷殘。20世紀初,有一個法西斯團體開始發動宣傳,主張在黑色大陸上應該積極建立白人的至高優先權。尤其是義大利於1896年的阿杜亞(Adoua)戰役受挫於衣索比亞部隊之後,重建白人霸權的欲望大張,認為文明大國的榮譽已被野蠻人玷污,必須要用鮮血來清洗。法西斯的宣傳認定利比亞是一個野蠻國家,其居民是落後的遊牧民族,然則,其風景又彷如明信片那麼漂亮,是一個很適合義大利人攻占的美好領地。
義大利入侵利比亞引發土耳其的不滿,兩國於1911年開戰。這是一場非常血腥的戰爭,最後是義大利於翌年大獲全勝。不過義大利也只能控制地中海沿岸的黎波里的地區,其他地方的反抗依然不斷,尤其是席雷奈格這個地區。瑟努西斯教派在這裡支持一支由阿爾默克塔(Omar Al-Mokhtar)領導的游擊部隊,這個游擊隊藏身山裡,十分厲害。儘管義大利軍隊的裝備和人馬都佔了優勢,卻還是常常被游擊隊突擊,損失重大。
然則,到了1930年代,墨索里尼在義大利當家,他採取極端政策根除抵抗,在利比亞的鎮壓變得十分兇暴,其中一個大屠夫就是葛拉季安尼將軍(Rodolf Graziani)。他曾經寫道:「義大利士兵深信他們揹負著一個文明而高貴的使命,他們必須不計代價完成這個使命……如果利比亞人不肯認命,不接受上天的安排,那麼,我們義大利人就必須持續作戰,也許必須將利比亞人民完全消滅才能夠取得和平,墳場的和平……」
2008年貝魯斯柯尼總理為這些殖民罪行補償利比亞。這當然是經過算計的策略:貝魯斯柯尼想要討好格達費以便尋求進一步的經濟合作。不管怎樣,利比亞人民的確深受殖民之害,即使要說是族群滅絕也不為過。
國王就是傀儡
問:利比亞後來是如何獨立的?
答:當義大利殖民者鎮壓席雷奈格地區的反抗時,瑟努西斯教派的領導人伊德里斯(Idrss)逃亡到埃及,在埃及和英國當局談判。第二次世界大戰之後,歐洲的殖民帝國一個個瓦解,而利比亞也在1951年獨立。在英國的支持之下,伊德里斯取得政權。然而,利比亞有一部分中產階級人士受到源自開羅的阿拉伯民族主義影響,希望利比亞能夠併入埃及,成就一個北非大國。可是,西方帝國主義強權不願意看到發展出一個阿拉伯大國,他們選擇支持利比亞獨立並扶植伊德里斯做為傀儡。
問:那麼,伊德里斯國王完全符合他們的期待嗎?
答:完全符合。獨立之後,組成利比亞的3個地區──的黎波里(Tripolitaine)、斐棧(Fezzan)和席雷奈格( Cyrénaïque)統合在一個聯邦體制下。可是,要知道,利比亞的領土3倍於法國,由於基礎建設欠缺,各個地域的界線其實很難認定,一直等到有航空器進行測量後,分界才比較明朗。1951年獨立時,利比亞人口約莫只有1百萬人。3個新近統合的地區,其歷史、文化的差異相當大。這個國家也根本沒有公路可以讓3個地區相通互連。因此,獨立初期的利比亞實質上還處於相當落後的階段,根本稱不上是一個真正的國家。
問:關於這個狀態,可否請你進一步說明?
答:「民族國家」是一個跟資產階級和資本主義的出現緊緊扣連的概念。在歐洲中世紀期間,資產階級希望他們的商貿活動可以擴展得越廣越好,可是卻被封建制度的種種限制給束縛了。每一個地方都被切割成無數的小小封建領土,商人貨物的輸送必須經過層層關卡,一次又一次地被扣稅被剝皮。這還不包括他們必須向每一個封建領主奉獻的禮品采金。所有這些路障都在資產階級革命之後打通了,民族國家也從而建立起來,允許商品在一個國家之內的龐大市場自由流通。
可是利比亞是在前資本主義階段被創建出來的。它的基礎建設嚴重欠缺,絕大部分的人民還是過著遊牧生活,根本難以管控,而社會中的分歧依然相當巨大,奴隸制度依然存在……此外,伊德里斯國王腦袋中根本沒有任何國家發展計畫,他完完全全依賴美國和英國的援助。
問:英國和美國為什麼要支持他?為了石油嗎?
答:在1951年,利比亞還沒有發現石油。但是英、美在利比亞境內有軍事基地,戰略上控制紅海和地中海。直到1954年,才有一個來自德州的大富豪韓特(Nelson Bunker Hunt)發現了利比亞的石油。當時,利比亞每桶石油的價碼只有阿拉伯地區石油的3分之1,可見這個國家是如何落後。當時,可以說是非洲最最貧困的一個國家。
革命泛阿拉伯主義
問:石油畢竟帶來了龐大收入,這些錢是怎麼使用的?
答:伊德里斯國王和他的集團,瑟努西斯教派核心人士靠著石油發家致富。他們也把一部分的石油收入分給其他部落的頭人,以緩和彼此的緊張關係。一小部分菁英靠著石油買賣也積累了一些財富,基礎建設開始有了一些投入,不過主要都集中在地中海沿岸,這是和外界做生意最受矚目的地帶。但是利比亞內地鄉野地區還是處於極端貧困的狀態,無數的窮人來到城市求生,集聚在都會邊緣的貧民窟。這樣的景況持續到1969年,3名軍官起來推翻了國王,其中一人就是格達費。
問:為何革命來自於軍隊中的軍官?
答:在一個部族分歧如此巨大的國家,軍隊其實就是唯一的國家體制。要不是有軍隊,利比亞這個國家根本就不算存在。除此之外,伊德里斯國王所屬的瑟努西斯集團也擁有他們自己的民兵。可是在國家軍隊,來自不同地區的年輕人可以在這裡交會,認識彼此。
格達費原先是參加一個服膺納塞主義的政治團體,可是他清楚這樣一個組合並不足以推翻王朝,於是決定入伍參軍。拉下伊德里斯國王的3名軍官都深深受到納塞的影響。其實納塞本身也是以埃及軍官的身分推翻法儒克(Farouk)國王。納塞受到社會主義的啟發,反對新殖民主義強權介入第三世界國家內政,主張阿拉伯世界大聯合。他上台後甚至將原本被英、法控制的蘇彝士運河收歸國有,這個舉動激怒了西方國家,導致1956年對埃及的轟炸。納塞的「革命泛阿拉伯主義」對於利比亞有相當大的迴響,尤其是在軍隊當中,格達費當然也是其中之一。利比亞軍官1969年所發動的政變基本上就是跟隨納塞的腳步。
問:利比亞革命帶來什麼改變?
答:格達費當時可以有兩個選擇。其一是將利比亞石油交給西方財團,就如同伊德里斯國王所做的一樣。那麼,利比亞就可能變成波斯灣地區的石油王國一樣,奴隸制度繼續存在,婦女被剝奪一切權利,而歐洲的那些所謂建築大師可以前來大顯身手,而天文數字般的預算則是來自阿拉伯人民口袋。或者,自主走上另一條獨立於新殖民強權的道路。格達費選擇了第二個選項,他將利比亞石油國有化。這當然也激怒了虎視眈眈的帝國主義者。
1950年代,在艾森豪總統時期的白宮流傳著一個笑話,這個笑話到了雷根總統時期發展為貨真價實的政治理論。你要如何辨別「好的阿拉伯人」和「壞的阿拉伯人」?答案是:一個好的阿拉伯人就是,美國說什麼,他就做什麼,於是,他會得到飛機做為回報,他可以把錢存到瑞士的銀行,可以被邀請到華盛頓作客等等。艾森豪和雷根都有屬於他們的好阿拉伯人,譬如,沙烏地阿拉伯和約旦的國王、科威特的親王、伊朗王室的首腦以及摩洛哥國王等,當然,別忘了利比亞的伊德里斯國王。至於壞的阿拉伯人,是哪些呢?那些不聽話的,譬如納塞、格達費,乃至稍後的海珊……
■利比亞東部大城班加西的一處牆上,塗鴉著格達費的肖像,圖攝於23日。(圖文/路透)
石油反革命
問:不過,格達費似乎不太……
答:格達費把槍口朝向群眾,這當然是有爭議的。不過,在沙烏地阿拉伯,在巴林,他們同樣對群眾開槍,而這些國家的領導人得到西方的一切讚許。對美國來說,格達費是一個壞阿拉伯人,因為他把石油國有化,而在1969年革命之前,西方石油集團根本上是把利比亞石油視為他們的囊中物。因為有石油收入的挹注,格達費為利比亞帶來了一些正面的改變,包括基礎建設、教育、醫療以及婦女的生活條件等等。
問:好吧,格達費推翻了王朝,將石油國有化,反對帝國強權,也為利比亞帶來正面改變。可是,在他當權40年之後,他畢竟是一個貪瀆的獨裁者,鎮壓反對的聲音,並且重新開門迎接西方大財團。你要怎麼解釋這些轉變?
答:剛開始的時候,格達費站在反對殖民強權的立場,並且慷慨支持世界上其他地方的解放運動,我很肯定他當年的作為。不過,要說清楚的是:格達費其實是反共的。1971年,他派人劫持了一輛載著蘇丹共產黨反對派人士的飛機,迫使其改變航道飛返蘇丹,這些人隨即被蘇丹總統尼梅黎(Nimeyri)處決。
事實上,格達費從來就不是一個有廣闊視野的政治家。他的革命是一場中產階級民族主義的革命,他是用國家資本主義在統治利比亞。要瞭解他的政權為何越走越偏,我們必須分析一些對他不利的因素,也要深入了解他個人所犯的錯誤。
首先,我們要知道,格達費剛接手的利比亞幾乎是一無所有,這個國家十分落後,根本沒有什麼受過教育的群眾或者強大的工人階級來支持革命。大部分受過良好教育的人都是屬於菁英階層,他們只會把利比亞的財富捧去奉送給新殖民強權。當然,這些人不會支持革命,他們當中有相當大部分的人乾脆就離開利比亞,到國外組織反對團體。
此外,推翻伊德里斯國王的軍官都深受納塞影響,埃及和利比亞原本是要計畫要連結成戰略上的夥伴關係。可是,1970年納塞逝世,整個計劃化為烏有。埃及從此變成一個反革命的國家,選擇向西方靠攏。埃及新總統沙達特親近美國,傾向自由市場經濟,並與以色列結盟。1977年,利比亞和埃及之間甚至爆發短暫衝突。想想看格達費的處境:一個曾經啟發他的國家,一個他曾經要緊密連結的國家,突然之間,變成他的敵人。
另一個對利比亞革命造成不利影響的重要因素是:1980年代石油價格大幅滑落。1973年,在以色列與周邊阿拉伯國家爆發戰爭的時候,幾個石油生產國決定採取禁運政策,造成油價急速攀升。此次禁運首度造成北方國家的財富往南方國家轉移。可是,到了1980年代,一個由雷根總統聯合沙烏地阿拉伯主導的「石油反革命」發生了,沙烏地阿拉伯大量增產,淹沒了整個石油市場,導致油價急速滑落。每桶石油的價格從35美元一下子摔到了8美元。
■利比亞的Al-Sedr儲油庫位在拉斯拉努夫鎮(Ras Lanuf)與賈瓦德鎮(Bin Jawad)之間,9日被支持格達費的軍隊所炸毀。(圖文/路透)
問:沙烏地阿拉伯豈不是搬石頭砸自己的腳?
答:對於他們的經濟當然不利。但是石油並不是沙烏地阿拉伯最重要的東西。最重要的是它與美國的關係。因為只有美國的支持才能維繫沙烏地阿拉伯王朝於不墜。
油價遽降對其他產油國而言是一場大災難,導致債台高築。而這一事件就發生在格達費掌權10年之後。他原本一無所有,如今可以用來進行建設的唯一財源又眼看著如同雪片在太陽下蒸發。
還要注意的是,這一波「石油反革命」也加速了蘇聯解體,導致它深陷於阿富汗戰爭而無以自拔。隨著蘇維埃集團的瓦解,利比亞失去了它最主要的政治支持者,在國際舞台上完全被孤立。而雷根政府把利比亞列入恐怖主義國家的黑名單,緊接著發動一系列的制裁行動,這讓利比亞更加難以喘息。
2011年2月28日 星期一
從埃及民主運動到中東和平進程
轉貼來源:亞洲周刊 二十五卷八期 (2011-02-27) 撰文:張翠容
http://www.yzzk.com/cfm/Content_Archive.cfm?Channel=ae&Path=3118114761/08ae4.cfm
埃及是現代伊斯蘭主義的發源地,也是很世俗化的國家。世俗化埃及精英擁護普世價值,著重個人生活品味,淡化宗教規條,這次革命首先由他們推動。歷史上他們與伊斯蘭主義者多次並肩作戰,現在再次攜手推翻獨裁。
有不少人關心埃及革命會否變成伊朗七九年伊斯蘭革命的翻版,甚至影響中東和平進程。這種擔憂並不出奇,因為過去十年以來,伊斯蘭激進主義已被描繪為世界上最大敵人,反恐是全球當務之急。然而,只要細心去看這次阿拉伯世界的震盪,根源在於三個字:不平等。埃及前總穆巴拉克就是以反恐之名,肆意剝奪人民的政治與經濟權利,但西方卻認為穆巴拉克路線有助穩定中東局勢。總之,穩定壓倒一切。諷剌的是,正是這種穩定論為社會埋下不穩定的因素。
原來,埃及是現代伊斯蘭主義的發源地,揮舞這面大旗的,就是美國標籤為極端伊斯蘭組織的穆斯林兄弟會。可是,在另方面,埃及給外界的印象卻又是一個非常世俗化的國家。在開羅,風情萬種的尼羅河兩岸泊著一艘又一艘張燈結綵的遊船,夜晚傳出節拍明快的音樂,身材豐滿的埃及女郎披上誘人輕紗,跳著奔放的肚皮舞,她要告訴世界,埃及的伊斯蘭文化是開明的。
位於開羅市中心解放廣場附近的美國大學(American University in Cairo,簡稱AUC)便是西方思想在阿拉伯地區的重要據點。儘管周圍環境混亂嘈雜,這所大學卻已成為開羅現代精神的座標,就讀的學生非富則貴,是培育埃及精英的搖籃。
精英與平民兩個世界
在埃及,精英階層畢竟屬少數。雖然世俗主義不但給予女性離婚的權利,也為她們打開了教育大門,但教育至今仍不普及,在埃及,不是很多人有機會完成中學教育,開羅這個大都會掩飾不了貧民窟的艱苦生活。事實上,只要走進開羅,便會很快感受到,有兩個世界並存著。在新城區,很小的一個區域,代表的是精英貴族階層。舊城區面積廣闊得多,也複雜得多,從充滿革命熱情的知識分子,到墨守伊斯蘭傳統的草根家庭都有。
舊城區裏有一個地方叫「伊斯蘭開羅」,矗立著一排排清真寺圓尖頂,一到頌禱時間,大批信徒在街頭上誠心跪拜,人山人海,景象壯觀。從中可以看到,信仰在埃及人心中,仍然佔有重要的位置。
不過,有一點值得留意的是,居住在新城區的埃及精英,有不少熱衷於推動埃及的現代化,擁護普世價值,著重個人生活品味,淡化宗教規條,靠向西方的人生指標。但在政治意識形態上,他們不一定支持穆巴拉克。我在開羅便認識好幾位畢業於AUC的年輕人,他們甚至認為穆巴拉克拖了埃及政治現代化的後腿,窒息埃及的發展。而埃及這次民主運動便首先由世俗化的年輕知識分子組織「四月六日運動」推動,吸引各階層人士參與,一呼百應,大家的訴求就在這一刻殊途同歸,當中自然包括穆斯林兄弟會。
回看歷史,我們不難發現,世俗知識分子與伊斯蘭主義者在反殖和爭取獨立上曾多次並肩作戰。歷史再次重複,這次他們站在同一道路上,推翻獨裁政權,但之後又怎樣呢?
開羅,這個遊客至愛的文化歷史名城,在古國裏如「夜明珠」照亮了尼羅河流域,滔滔河水孕育了人類最古老的文明之一,也見證了世界上最漫長的不同殖民統治。
在十九世紀末二十世紀初,奧斯曼帝國的黑暗統治激發起阿拉伯民族主義思潮。第一次世界大戰後,英國殖民者上台,完全控制了埃及,這進一步激發起埃及人的民族主義。此時,有年輕學者阿班納振臂一呼:重現《古蘭經》的聖訓,才是拯救民族的方法!他遂掀起了阿拉伯世界第一波現代伊斯蘭主義運動,並創立了在伊斯蘭世界影響至深的穆斯林兄弟會。
三、四十年代,英國扶植埃及法魯克國王,該政權腐敗無能,其軍隊更是荒淫無度,激起民憤,穆斯林兄弟會在「自由軍官集團」的協助下,秘密組織軍事力量,推翻法魯克。「自由軍官集團」是世俗化民族主義運動的火車頭,在抵抗外國侵略、推翻封建王朝的抗爭道路上,該集團的領導人納賽爾與阿班納惺惺相惜,成為最佳戰友。納賽爾建立埃及共和國後,走親蘇聯社會主義道路,逐漸對穆斯林兄弟會步步為營,甚至到後期更對兄弟會大力打壓。至於接替納賽爾的薩達特,他與兄弟會也曾有過一段淵源。他年輕時深受阿班納演說吸引,是第一個將阿班納介紹到軍營上宣揚兄弟會信念的自由軍官集團成員。他執政後,利用兄弟會打擊納賽爾餘黨,兄弟會借機再度活躍,後來又遭打壓。
納賽爾在位期間,於一九六七年的中東戰爭慘敗給以色列,社會上因此普遍瀰漫著挫敗感,這令到兄弟會即使轉到地下活動仍然大有市場。
到了薩達特,他在一九七三年突襲以色列,取回失地,贏得聲望,但由於後來靠向西方資本主義的施政失誤,貧富越見懸殊,加上他漸漸向美國靠攏,並與以色列簽署和約,雖然他理據感人,更因此贏得諾貝爾和平獎,但民間卻認為和約不平等,遂產生了一股怨氣,兄弟會因而迅速吸納了不少中下階層的成員,並擴及知識階層。最後薩達特死於狂熱伊斯蘭主義者的暗殺。
薩達特死後,其副手穆巴拉克正式展開他長達三十年的鐵腕統治,而且更向美以利益傾斜,埃及人感到對阿拉伯兄弟不公,可是他們在國內政策和外交政策上都失去了聲音,完全沒有發言權。這令到埃及人對穆氏非常反感,而且使埃及社會的仇美仇以情緒更為高漲。
我零二年第一次到埃及採訪時,正好碰上以色列軍圍困巴勒斯坦自治區,硝煙高漲。我約一位埃及年輕記者到美國大學對面的麥當勞吃早餐,他立即提出抗議,說﹕埃及人都認為買了一個漢堡就等於殺掉一位巴勒斯坦弟兄!這種看法在開羅十分普遍,開羅人相信美國企業與美國政府朋黨為奸,提供以色列最先進武器殺害巴勒斯坦人。
當年,一位埃及洗衣店老板唱了一首歌《我恨以色列》,便立即紅透半邊天,其後當上職業歌星,成為埃及的一個傳奇。不過,這個歌星也一度淪為階下囚,關了好幾個月才釋放。除了歌星外,政府亦大舉鎮壓異見分子和伊斯蘭組織成員,草木皆兵。事實上,自一九六七年六日戰爭後,當時埃及政府以反恐名義推行緊急法,社會上立刻出現很多隱藏的耳朵與眼睛,埃及人直指自己國家是個「警察國家」。
可是,在新一輪的「反恐法」下,人民的政治權利進一步受到剝奪。另方面,經歷過大半世紀的鬥爭,兄弟會漸露疲乏,力主求和,主張走議會道路,用和平手段爭取權力。即使曾經倡議暴力主義的伊斯蘭集團,也表示願意解除武裝。
由此觀之,這次埃及革命之火,西方評論把焦點放在埃及伊斯蘭組織身上,誇大其奪權能力,對不少追求民主的埃及年輕人來說,是有欠公允的。即使穆巴拉克把伊斯蘭組織打壓了,但仍難掩飾他在經濟上所造就的不平等,而他的獨裁腐敗亦令其政府缺少推動國家財富再分配,從而改變不平等現狀的政策空間。
近年穆巴拉克拼GDP,高利潤產業受惠,埃及經濟增長大步向前。這數年間外資湧入埃及的投資額佔非洲第一名,股市也翻了幾倍,可是,老百姓卻無法分享這經濟成果,反之失業貧窮越益嚴重。
百姓享受不到經濟成果
從開羅市中心坐車到金字塔地區只需半小時,有時真不敢相信,半小時之內便穿梭於兩個截然不同的世界,沿路不少貧民窟在眼前湧現。在金字塔坐落的沙漠地區,人民居住在古老的房子裏,駱駝與馬匹是他們經濟的支柱。原本孕育萬物的尼羅河三角洲,他們感到得不到什麼好處。
馬兒的嘶叫聲、駱駝蹄聲,迴盪在歷史長廊裏,沙漠的滾滾黃沙捲起人們對這個埃及古老文明的懷念,我隱隱嗅到木乃伊身上的香料。但對埃及人而言,他們有說不出的憤怒,為信仰、為政治、為經濟,即使為個人前途,他們似乎總徘徊在十字路口上。
終於他們站起來,為過去所受的種種不平等待遇。現在,革命取得初步的成功了,新的社會契約又將會是怎樣一副模樣?無論如何,從埃及的民主運動,可以看到,越是採取高壓手段,越是向一方利益傾斜,便越難令穩定扎根。只有平等的對話,大家有機會共同創造較為公平公義的社會,和平才會降臨。這對一直受美以利益主導的中東和平進程,也不無啟示。
http://www.yzzk.com/cfm/Content_Archive.cfm?Channel=ae&Path=3118114761/08ae4.cfm
埃及是現代伊斯蘭主義的發源地,也是很世俗化的國家。世俗化埃及精英擁護普世價值,著重個人生活品味,淡化宗教規條,這次革命首先由他們推動。歷史上他們與伊斯蘭主義者多次並肩作戰,現在再次攜手推翻獨裁。
有不少人關心埃及革命會否變成伊朗七九年伊斯蘭革命的翻版,甚至影響中東和平進程。這種擔憂並不出奇,因為過去十年以來,伊斯蘭激進主義已被描繪為世界上最大敵人,反恐是全球當務之急。然而,只要細心去看這次阿拉伯世界的震盪,根源在於三個字:不平等。埃及前總穆巴拉克就是以反恐之名,肆意剝奪人民的政治與經濟權利,但西方卻認為穆巴拉克路線有助穩定中東局勢。總之,穩定壓倒一切。諷剌的是,正是這種穩定論為社會埋下不穩定的因素。
原來,埃及是現代伊斯蘭主義的發源地,揮舞這面大旗的,就是美國標籤為極端伊斯蘭組織的穆斯林兄弟會。可是,在另方面,埃及給外界的印象卻又是一個非常世俗化的國家。在開羅,風情萬種的尼羅河兩岸泊著一艘又一艘張燈結綵的遊船,夜晚傳出節拍明快的音樂,身材豐滿的埃及女郎披上誘人輕紗,跳著奔放的肚皮舞,她要告訴世界,埃及的伊斯蘭文化是開明的。
位於開羅市中心解放廣場附近的美國大學(American University in Cairo,簡稱AUC)便是西方思想在阿拉伯地區的重要據點。儘管周圍環境混亂嘈雜,這所大學卻已成為開羅現代精神的座標,就讀的學生非富則貴,是培育埃及精英的搖籃。
精英與平民兩個世界
在埃及,精英階層畢竟屬少數。雖然世俗主義不但給予女性離婚的權利,也為她們打開了教育大門,但教育至今仍不普及,在埃及,不是很多人有機會完成中學教育,開羅這個大都會掩飾不了貧民窟的艱苦生活。事實上,只要走進開羅,便會很快感受到,有兩個世界並存著。在新城區,很小的一個區域,代表的是精英貴族階層。舊城區面積廣闊得多,也複雜得多,從充滿革命熱情的知識分子,到墨守伊斯蘭傳統的草根家庭都有。
舊城區裏有一個地方叫「伊斯蘭開羅」,矗立著一排排清真寺圓尖頂,一到頌禱時間,大批信徒在街頭上誠心跪拜,人山人海,景象壯觀。從中可以看到,信仰在埃及人心中,仍然佔有重要的位置。
不過,有一點值得留意的是,居住在新城區的埃及精英,有不少熱衷於推動埃及的現代化,擁護普世價值,著重個人生活品味,淡化宗教規條,靠向西方的人生指標。但在政治意識形態上,他們不一定支持穆巴拉克。我在開羅便認識好幾位畢業於AUC的年輕人,他們甚至認為穆巴拉克拖了埃及政治現代化的後腿,窒息埃及的發展。而埃及這次民主運動便首先由世俗化的年輕知識分子組織「四月六日運動」推動,吸引各階層人士參與,一呼百應,大家的訴求就在這一刻殊途同歸,當中自然包括穆斯林兄弟會。
回看歷史,我們不難發現,世俗知識分子與伊斯蘭主義者在反殖和爭取獨立上曾多次並肩作戰。歷史再次重複,這次他們站在同一道路上,推翻獨裁政權,但之後又怎樣呢?
開羅,這個遊客至愛的文化歷史名城,在古國裏如「夜明珠」照亮了尼羅河流域,滔滔河水孕育了人類最古老的文明之一,也見證了世界上最漫長的不同殖民統治。
在十九世紀末二十世紀初,奧斯曼帝國的黑暗統治激發起阿拉伯民族主義思潮。第一次世界大戰後,英國殖民者上台,完全控制了埃及,這進一步激發起埃及人的民族主義。此時,有年輕學者阿班納振臂一呼:重現《古蘭經》的聖訓,才是拯救民族的方法!他遂掀起了阿拉伯世界第一波現代伊斯蘭主義運動,並創立了在伊斯蘭世界影響至深的穆斯林兄弟會。
三、四十年代,英國扶植埃及法魯克國王,該政權腐敗無能,其軍隊更是荒淫無度,激起民憤,穆斯林兄弟會在「自由軍官集團」的協助下,秘密組織軍事力量,推翻法魯克。「自由軍官集團」是世俗化民族主義運動的火車頭,在抵抗外國侵略、推翻封建王朝的抗爭道路上,該集團的領導人納賽爾與阿班納惺惺相惜,成為最佳戰友。納賽爾建立埃及共和國後,走親蘇聯社會主義道路,逐漸對穆斯林兄弟會步步為營,甚至到後期更對兄弟會大力打壓。至於接替納賽爾的薩達特,他與兄弟會也曾有過一段淵源。他年輕時深受阿班納演說吸引,是第一個將阿班納介紹到軍營上宣揚兄弟會信念的自由軍官集團成員。他執政後,利用兄弟會打擊納賽爾餘黨,兄弟會借機再度活躍,後來又遭打壓。
納賽爾在位期間,於一九六七年的中東戰爭慘敗給以色列,社會上因此普遍瀰漫著挫敗感,這令到兄弟會即使轉到地下活動仍然大有市場。
到了薩達特,他在一九七三年突襲以色列,取回失地,贏得聲望,但由於後來靠向西方資本主義的施政失誤,貧富越見懸殊,加上他漸漸向美國靠攏,並與以色列簽署和約,雖然他理據感人,更因此贏得諾貝爾和平獎,但民間卻認為和約不平等,遂產生了一股怨氣,兄弟會因而迅速吸納了不少中下階層的成員,並擴及知識階層。最後薩達特死於狂熱伊斯蘭主義者的暗殺。
薩達特死後,其副手穆巴拉克正式展開他長達三十年的鐵腕統治,而且更向美以利益傾斜,埃及人感到對阿拉伯兄弟不公,可是他們在國內政策和外交政策上都失去了聲音,完全沒有發言權。這令到埃及人對穆氏非常反感,而且使埃及社會的仇美仇以情緒更為高漲。
我零二年第一次到埃及採訪時,正好碰上以色列軍圍困巴勒斯坦自治區,硝煙高漲。我約一位埃及年輕記者到美國大學對面的麥當勞吃早餐,他立即提出抗議,說﹕埃及人都認為買了一個漢堡就等於殺掉一位巴勒斯坦弟兄!這種看法在開羅十分普遍,開羅人相信美國企業與美國政府朋黨為奸,提供以色列最先進武器殺害巴勒斯坦人。
當年,一位埃及洗衣店老板唱了一首歌《我恨以色列》,便立即紅透半邊天,其後當上職業歌星,成為埃及的一個傳奇。不過,這個歌星也一度淪為階下囚,關了好幾個月才釋放。除了歌星外,政府亦大舉鎮壓異見分子和伊斯蘭組織成員,草木皆兵。事實上,自一九六七年六日戰爭後,當時埃及政府以反恐名義推行緊急法,社會上立刻出現很多隱藏的耳朵與眼睛,埃及人直指自己國家是個「警察國家」。
可是,在新一輪的「反恐法」下,人民的政治權利進一步受到剝奪。另方面,經歷過大半世紀的鬥爭,兄弟會漸露疲乏,力主求和,主張走議會道路,用和平手段爭取權力。即使曾經倡議暴力主義的伊斯蘭集團,也表示願意解除武裝。
由此觀之,這次埃及革命之火,西方評論把焦點放在埃及伊斯蘭組織身上,誇大其奪權能力,對不少追求民主的埃及年輕人來說,是有欠公允的。即使穆巴拉克把伊斯蘭組織打壓了,但仍難掩飾他在經濟上所造就的不平等,而他的獨裁腐敗亦令其政府缺少推動國家財富再分配,從而改變不平等現狀的政策空間。
近年穆巴拉克拼GDP,高利潤產業受惠,埃及經濟增長大步向前。這數年間外資湧入埃及的投資額佔非洲第一名,股市也翻了幾倍,可是,老百姓卻無法分享這經濟成果,反之失業貧窮越益嚴重。
百姓享受不到經濟成果
從開羅市中心坐車到金字塔地區只需半小時,有時真不敢相信,半小時之內便穿梭於兩個截然不同的世界,沿路不少貧民窟在眼前湧現。在金字塔坐落的沙漠地區,人民居住在古老的房子裏,駱駝與馬匹是他們經濟的支柱。原本孕育萬物的尼羅河三角洲,他們感到得不到什麼好處。
馬兒的嘶叫聲、駱駝蹄聲,迴盪在歷史長廊裏,沙漠的滾滾黃沙捲起人們對這個埃及古老文明的懷念,我隱隱嗅到木乃伊身上的香料。但對埃及人而言,他們有說不出的憤怒,為信仰、為政治、為經濟,即使為個人前途,他們似乎總徘徊在十字路口上。
終於他們站起來,為過去所受的種種不平等待遇。現在,革命取得初步的成功了,新的社會契約又將會是怎樣一副模樣?無論如何,從埃及的民主運動,可以看到,越是採取高壓手段,越是向一方利益傾斜,便越難令穩定扎根。只有平等的對話,大家有機會共同創造較為公平公義的社會,和平才會降臨。這對一直受美以利益主導的中東和平進程,也不無啟示。
2011年2月25日 星期五
埃及的運動─對話薩米爾.阿敏Samir Amin
轉貼來源:台灣立報 2011-2-24
http://www.lihpao.com/?action-viewnews-itemid-104716
■汪暉、劉健芝
說明
2011年2月9日至13日,世界社會論壇(World Social Forum)在塞內加爾首都達卡舉行。
這也正是埃及社會運動如火如荼之際。我們也就此與出身埃及的著名理論家和社會運動的組織者薩米爾.阿敏和其他埃及知識份子進行了多次交談和討論。這裡發表的文字是根據與阿敏先生的兩次談話記錄整理而成。
時間:2011年2月9日到13日
地點:「世界社會論壇」,塞內加爾達卡大學。
與談人:
阿敏:埃及人,依附理論的最重要理論家之一,長期致力於第三世界的社會運動,是「第三世界論壇」(Third World Forum)和「另類實踐世界論壇」(World Forum for Alternatives)的創始人和主席。
汪暉:清華大學人文學院教授,人文與社會科學研究所所長。
劉健芝:香港嶺南大學副教授,長期從事亞洲和第三世界的社會運動,是「另類實踐世界論壇」的副主席,與阿敏和鄔達(François Houtart)主編《抵抗的全球化》上、下冊,人民文學出版社出版。
群眾運動的成分與戰略
汪暉:薩米爾,謝謝您昨天給我的關於埃及運動的提綱。我們都非常關心埃及正在發生的事情。現在許多地區的媒體將突尼斯、埃及發生的運動與先前的中亞顏色革命相提並論,但這種說法混淆了這些運動之間的重要差別。我直觀的印象是:這是一場不同於1989年蘇東解體以來的那些親西方的、肯定資本主義體制的顏色革命的革命。當前的這場大規模民主運動不可避免地包含著對於美國全球霸權的抗議。
在那篇提綱的開頭,您指出埃及是美國控制全球的計畫的一塊基石,正由於此,美國不會容忍埃及的任何越出其全球戰略的行動,這個行動也是以色列對巴勒斯坦實行殖民統治所需要的。這也是美國要求穆巴拉克立即實行和平過渡的唯一目的。他們希望穆巴拉克任命的情報頭子蘇雷曼(Omar Souleiman)來接任,以維繫這一全球戰略的基石。您能否談談你對運動本身的看法?
阿敏:我的短文談的是對立方,即美國和埃及統治階級的戰略。很多人不瞭解這個情況。現在我想談一下群眾運動的成分與戰略。
反對力量有四個組成部分。第一,是年輕人。他們政治化,有很強的組織能力,組織動員的數目超過百萬人,這絕對不是個小數目。他們反對現有的社會與經濟制度,至於是否反對資本主義,對他們來說可能太概念化了,但是他們反對的是社會的非正義和不平等。
他們的民族主義是愛國的,是反帝國主義的。他們痛恨埃及向美國霸權屈服,因此他們也反對所謂的與以色列的和平協議,拒絕容忍以色列繼續實行對巴勒斯坦的殖民主義佔領。他們追求民主,完全反對軍隊和員警的獨裁。
他們有分散的領導班子。當他們給出示威的指令時,能動員百萬人,但是幾個小時之內,全國就有1千5百萬人回應,連小鎮和村落都動員起來。他們在全國範圍內可以即時引起強大的正面迴響。
第二個組成部分是激進左派,來自共產主義的傳統。年輕人並不反對共產黨人,但是他們不想被置於有領袖和指揮的政黨的框架裡。他們與共產黨人的關係不錯,完全沒有問題。幸虧有大規模的示威,兩者走在一起,不是誰領導誰,而是互相的配合。
資產階級民主派與穆斯林兄弟會
汪暉:也就是說,無論是青年運動還是左翼共產主義者,他們對現政權的批判、他們對民主的訴求,不僅包含著對美國霸權的抵抗,也包含著對於現行的社會、政治和經濟制度的批判。在傳統左翼與青年運動之間有著相近的傾向,不同的地方在於運動的形態,即當代運動並不希望將自身組織在政黨等高度組織化的框架內。這從運動拒絕各種組織試圖代表他們的努力中也可以看到。那麼,巴拉迪(Mohamed El Baradei)代表著怎樣的力量?
阿敏:他代表的是運動的第三個組成部分,即資產階級民主派。現制度是那麼充滿員警與黑社會的暴力,不少中產階級,包括小商人,不斷被欺淩。他們不屬於左派,他們接受資本主義、市場與商業,甚至並不完全反美;他們不擁護以色列,但是接受以色列的存在。然而,他們也是民主派,反對軍隊、員警和黑社會的權力集中。
巴拉迪是典型的資產階級民主派,信奉「真正的選舉」和尊重法制。他完全不懂經濟制度的問題,只知道正在運行的市場,卻不理解這正是社會崩潰的根源。他也不知道什麼是社會主義,可他是民主派。他在國外比在埃及更有名,但也可能快速地改變這一局面,成為轉軌過程的一個參與者。問題是,如果軍隊和情報機構不放棄對於社會的高壓統治,巴拉迪是否接受?
汪暉:巴拉迪要求的是通常所說的政治民主,而對這種政治民主到底與怎樣的社會形式相配合,他沒有看法,因為他基本接受現行的資本主義體制。在伊拉克戰爭前夕,圍繞大規模殺傷性武器的核查問題,他曾經與美國有矛盾,但並沒有另類的思想。那麼,「穆斯林兄弟會」的態度怎樣?西方媒體非常重視他們。
阿敏:穆斯林兄弟會是第四個組成部分。儘管他們在公開的政治領域有群眾的支持,但他們是極端反動的。他們不僅是宗教意識形態,而且在社會傾向上是反動的。他們公開反對工人的罷工,明確站在政權一邊。他們認為工人應該接受現行的市場。
他們也採取反對農民運動的立場。埃及有強大的中農運動,他們受到市場和富農的侵害,他們要為保留他們的財產而鬥爭。穆斯林兄弟會的立場是反對中農的,說土地所有權是私有權,說可蘭經支持市場是神聖的。
穆斯林兄弟會事實上是與政權合謀的。表面上,政權與穆斯林兄弟會是矛盾鬥爭的,但事實上他們是聯合的。國家政權給了穆斯林兄弟會三個主要的體系:教育、司法、國家電視廣播。這些都是極為重要的國家機構。通過教育,他們先是迫使學校的女孩然後是全社會戴上頭巾;通過司法,他們引入了穆斯林的律令;通過傳媒,他們影響著輿論。
穆斯林兄弟會的領導層從來是腐敗的、非常富有的政治領導層,他們一直接受沙烏地阿拉伯的金錢資助,也就是說美國的資助。他們在兩個社會階層中有重大影響,其一是親資本主義、反共產主義、害怕民眾的中產階級,這些人認為穆斯林的統治不是壞事。中產階層自發地支持穆斯林兄弟會。他們在教師、醫生、律師等專業階層中有非常大的影響力。
同時,穆斯林兄弟會從流氓階層招收他們的雇傭民兵。埃及有大規模的貧困人口,在開羅,1千5百萬人口裡面有5百萬極貧人口。穆斯林兄弟會在其中政治意識很低的窮人中找到他們能夠動員的民兵隊伍。
如果運動「成功」,「選舉」進行,穆斯林兄弟會將成為議會的主要力量。美國對此是歡迎的,並認為他們是「溫和的」。其實不過是易於駕馭而已,他們可以接受美國的戰略,讓以色列繼續佔領巴勒斯坦。穆斯林兄弟會完全認同現行的「市場」體制,對外是依附的。他們事實上是統治階級中「買辦」的同夥。
群眾要推翻的是整個制度
汪暉:穆斯林兄弟會代表著宗教性的政治力量,但按照您的分析,這種宗教性的政治力量並沒有提供關於社會和經濟體制的另類選擇,恰恰相反,宗教的政治化與市場體制的鞏固之間並沒有衝突關係。上述4個方面各有不同的取向、特徵和背景,那這幾個運動是如何走到一起的?
阿敏:事情是這樣發生的:運動由年輕人發起,激進左派立即加入,第二天資產階級民主派加入。穆斯林兄弟會在頭4天是抵制這個群眾運動的,因為他們以為員警會很快鎮壓平亂;當他們看到運動並沒有被壓下去的時候,領導層覺得不能留在外面,才參加進去。大家必須知道這個事實。
汪暉:讓我們再談談美國的戰略。您在短文中曾經提到,美國對埃及的戰略與巴基斯坦模式非常相似,就是「政治的伊斯蘭」與軍事情報系統的結合。如果再加上一句,就是全球化的資本主義市場體制。這樣一種體制能夠產生出民主嗎?
阿敏:群眾要推翻的是整個制度,不僅是穆巴拉克,但穆巴拉克是制度的象徵。穆巴拉克任命蘇雷曼為副總統之後,不到幾個小時,群眾喊的口號是:「不要穆巴拉克,不要蘇雷曼,他們兩個都是美國人。」
歐巴馬說我們需要軟過渡,就像菲律賓當年那樣。群眾說,我們要推翻的不是一個罪犯,而是所有罪犯,我們要的是真正的過渡,不要假的。群眾的政治意識很高。可是,美國的目的是軟過渡,怎麼做?就是公開地與右派、中間派、穆斯林兄弟會以至部分資產階級民主派協商,同時孤立年輕人和左派,這就是他們的戰略。
不論他們是否達成正式的協定,穆巴拉克是要出局的。副總統蘇雷曼發起所謂的協商邀請,穆斯林兄弟會很聰明,拒絕了邀請,但是他們原則上是接受與制度協商的。
美國的目的並不是民主
汪暉:但目前運動的主要力量是青年運動和更為廣泛的社會運動。工人罷工了,那是傳統左翼長期活動的區域。那麼,面對美國和埃及統治階層的這種所謂「軟過渡」策略,群眾如何反應?
阿敏:群眾運動的大會每天都在討論真正的過渡的規則:
第一:立即解散假民主的議會;
第二:立即取消戒嚴令,容許自由的集會權;
第三:開始制訂新憲法;
第四:選舉立憲議會;
第五:不要立即或者很快的選舉,而是容許一段長的自由時期。如果是立即選舉,很多人會投票給穆斯林兄弟會,因為他們有組織力、有傳媒等等。可是,如果有一年的真正自由,那麼,左派和年輕人便可以自我組織。
這是一場漫長鬥爭的開端。埃及是革命長期進行的地方。1920年到1952年的長革命時期,有進有退。長遠來說,左派和年輕人占了多數,有行動能力。可是,一個可能的壞前景是,穆斯林兄弟會和政權會用力打擊左派和年輕人,政權已經這樣做了。這個制度是非常惡毒的。在示威期間,政權打開了監獄,釋放了1萬7千名罪犯,給他們支持穆巴拉克的徽章、武器、金錢,並保證他們不會重返監獄,讓他們去襲擊示威者。示威的群眾並沒有衝擊監獄,是員警把他們釋放的。
汪暉:社會運動提出的口號之一,是要求建立一個文職政府(civil government),即這個政府既不能是軍人的政府,也不能是宗教政府。這也正是「civil」這一語詞的真正含義。
從策略上說,運動需要一定的準備時期,在廣泛動員和參與的基礎上,形成自身的綱領和代表人物,以便直接介入大規模運動之後的政治進程。
穆巴拉克的員警專制,使得埃及社會缺乏政治空間,除了轉入地下的共產黨和穆斯林兄弟會之外,社會處於一種「去政治化」的狀態。現在的任務是「重新政治化」,也正處於「重新政治化」的過程之中。
「去政治化」既是穆巴拉克體制垮台的原因,也是今天社會運動面臨的困難。如果「軟過渡」策略部分奏效,即穆巴拉克下台,由軍方和員警力量支撐,群眾運動能否持續並形成更為清晰的目標,就成了一個最重要的挑戰。
您認為年輕人是支持左派的,但可能右派和穆斯林兄弟會也會試圖分化年輕人。最重要的是年輕人和民主派不支持美國。民主派會怎樣,他們能夠提出什麼目標嗎?
阿敏:很多民主派是中立的,並不反美。巴拉迪很天真,以為美國支持民主。我們不斷強調的是,美國的目的並不是民主。
■埃及軍方高層將領在電視上發表完致詞後,開羅解放廣場上的群眾高聲歡呼慶祝,圖攝於2月10日。(圖文/路透)
農民在運動中的角色
劉健芝:傳統左派運動與工人之間有密切關係。工人起了什麼作用?
阿敏:3年前,一個罷工浪潮橫掃埃及,那是50年以來非洲大陸(包括南非)最強大的工人運動。從納塞時期開始,官方的工會完全被國家政權控制,就像蘇聯的國家控制工會的模式。因此,罷工不是由工會領導層發動的,而是由基層發起的。在這個意義上,罷工是自發的,取得了重大的勝利。
3年前,政權就想調動員警鎮壓,但是資方覺得不行,怕把工廠都毀了。於是他們進行協商,罷工工人贏得的工資增長並不多,只有10%或5%,連通貨膨脹吃掉的都追不上,可是,他們贏得了很重要的成果,就是尊嚴和工會權利,譬如說,解雇工人要有工會認可。他們接著成立了新的獨立工會,這次也參加了運動。
劉健芝:農民在運動中的角色如何?
阿敏:相對而言,農民運動很難串聯。農民運動從1920年以來一直很激進,他們要反對的既有大地主,也有富農。富農在農村社會裡勢力很強,他們不像地主那樣不在地生活,他們跟政府、律師、醫生都有密切的關係。另外的是中農、貧農、赤貧農和無地農民。
無地農民的狀況在過去30年並沒有惡化,因為他們出去海灣國家打工,賺了一點小錢,回來不夠買地,但夠他們在灰色經濟裡面做些小生意。赤貧的農民最受剝奪,因為新自由主義的市場讓他們任由富農、新資產階級地主和現代的埃及農業企業剝奪。赤貧農民最為激進,並不反對共產主義者,但是他們不知道什麼是共產主義。他們就是不知道。
汪暉:傳統左翼和共產主義運動在工人中影響很大。但對於農民,埃及的共產主義者的影響如何?
阿敏:共產主義者的不足,是一直沒有去團結農民。然則,唯一去跟他們討論的只有共產主義者,沒有穆斯林兄弟會,沒有資產階級民主派。可是,雖然沒有人刻意團結農民,他們卻繼續進行他們的鬥爭。
汪暉:在廣大的第三世界國家,農民的動員和角色始終是重要的一環。農民有沒有參加近期的動員?
阿敏:農民在農村有動員,但是沒有跟大運動連接。他們沒有參與討論過渡的民眾大會。
汪暉:運動是否主要是城市的?
阿敏:主要在城市,小城鎮也有。
反抗資本全球化的性質
汪暉:埃及的運動帶有強烈的自發性,不同的力量突然地加入到這場聲勢浩大的運動之中。這個運動與20世紀以政黨政治為動員機制的大眾運動十分不同,也不同於單純的階級運動,儘管工人階級和傳統左翼也是這場運動的重要的參與者。運動開始之後,許多政治組織和機會主義者試圖代表運動出來與政府談判,但大眾運動拒絕他們的代表性。您怎麼解釋運動的自發性?
阿敏:民眾對現制度、對員警都極為厭倦了。如果你只因很小的問題(例如闖紅燈)被逮捕,你會被毒打,被折磨。員警施加日常的鎮壓欺淩,完全無法無天,醜惡無比。民眾也厭倦了黑社會制度。世界銀行所說的代表未來的銀行家,是強盜流氓。他們怎麼累積財富的?是通過國家無償給他們土地,他們轉賣給地產商。這是巧取豪奪來累積的財富。他們把真正的企業家擠壓走了。
民眾也厭倦了美國的霸權。埃及人是民族主義愛國者。我們會問:我們怎麼可能這麼卑微,每天每個事情都由美國領事和美國總統來獨裁決定?另外,還有社會的衰敗,大多數人面對的是不斷惡化的失業和貧苦,社會不平等極為嚴重。所有這些加起來的不滿,讓政府徹底失去合法性。民眾說,夠了!忽然就爆炸了。有人因此犧牲了,但是他們知道,如果你參加鬥爭,你是可能犧牲的。
劉健芝:民眾的厭倦是長期的厭倦,忽然就爆炸,來自兩個當前的危機,一是高物價,二是高等教育青年的高失業率。民眾運動怎麼解決這兩個問題?
阿敏:這些問題都是資本主義危機造成的,因此,這次運動才帶有反抗資本主義全球化的性質。這正是要從根本上去解決危機問題。只要這場大眾的民主運動能夠獲得成功,民眾就會推進真正的社會經濟進步,化解這些危機。
汪暉:沙達特在美國支持下與以色列單獨媾和。過去30年,阿拉伯世界是分裂的。埃及作為阿拉伯世界的領頭羊,對於阿拉伯世界有過重大影響。儘管穆巴拉克在巴勒斯坦和以色列的和談中扮演特殊角色,但埃及的國際影響,尤其是在阿拉伯世界中的影響,實際上下降了。
昨天跟一位埃及朋友聊天,他對目前運動感到興奮──世界終於重新認識到埃及是一個多麼重要的國家!阿拉伯世界的格局十分複雜和微妙,其中最有影響的國家是那些親美的、接受現行資本主義體制的專制國家。那麼,埃及這場運動對阿拉伯世界的團結、對於阿拉伯世界內部的社會運動會有什麼影響?
阿敏:會引起迴響,但每個國家是不同的。突尼斯國家小,教育水準和生活水準都比較高,但是因為它小,在全球經濟裡面,它很脆弱。
汪暉:好像突尼斯的民眾組織更好,埃及群眾更為自發。對巴勒斯坦肯定會有影響吧?
阿敏:肯定是的。對敘利亞也有衝擊,那兒的情況很複雜。我們很難知道對伊拉克的影響是怎麼樣。南葉門是民族主義、民粹主義左派,帶有馬克思主義的修辭,有某種激進左派的思想。但它也像南北朝鮮,北方落後南方發達。葉門有可能再分裂,因為南方不能接受統一。
■人民聽到穆巴拉克下台時,熱淚盈眶。(圖╱Islam El Azzazi攝影團隊提供)
群眾大會尋找新憲法理念
(以下是2月13日穆巴拉克下台後通過電話所做的補充訪談)
劉健芝:穆巴拉克下台了,您對最新的發展有什麼評論?
阿敏:首先,穆巴拉克沒有辭職,他是給武裝部隊最高委員會的政變趕走的。他跟他的副總統蘇雷曼都被趕走了。新的軍隊領導層聲稱它會執政,一直到新選舉舉行之後,然後,軍隊會返回軍營。軍隊說在這個期間,它會處理過渡。
但是,群眾運動大會繼續工作,第一,推進新民主,要求所有公民的自由權利,例如集社自由、傳媒權利等等。第二,群眾運動大會將尋找新憲法的理念,俾使選舉的是立憲議會而不是立法議會,儘管政府想做的是部分修改現行憲法。
現在要知道新政府會怎麼樣處理情況,還言之尚早。再多等幾天,情況就會明朗。群眾運動還沒有完成它的工作。軍隊領導層希望有一個強過渡,推進選舉,穆斯林兄弟會將會取得多數。我們希望選舉前有一個緩過渡,以讓新的政治、民主力量可以組織起來,可以發展它們的綱領和工作,並能跟社會公眾有交流。
汪暉:這也許是這場運動能否成為一場真正的革命的關鍵。廣泛的社會運動只有通過大會的形式才能形成自己的綱領和領導層,參與制憲過程,而現成的形式民主框架,很可能導致在前政權下已經存在的組織,如穆斯林兄弟會或軍方推薦的人物,佔據議會和權力的中心──事實上,穆巴拉克政權也有某種民主形式,但它的代議制和選舉制不具有代表性,而是專斷的政治形式。一個通過大眾民主而產生的真正的civil government能否成型,是未來埃及政治走向的關鍵。這對今天埃及青年運動、工人運動和進步組織是一個真正的挑戰。
(本文經汪暉與劉健芝校正,並全文交由《新國際》發表)
http://www.lihpao.com/?action-viewnews-itemid-104716
■汪暉、劉健芝
說明
2011年2月9日至13日,世界社會論壇(World Social Forum)在塞內加爾首都達卡舉行。
這也正是埃及社會運動如火如荼之際。我們也就此與出身埃及的著名理論家和社會運動的組織者薩米爾.阿敏和其他埃及知識份子進行了多次交談和討論。這裡發表的文字是根據與阿敏先生的兩次談話記錄整理而成。
時間:2011年2月9日到13日
地點:「世界社會論壇」,塞內加爾達卡大學。
與談人:
阿敏:埃及人,依附理論的最重要理論家之一,長期致力於第三世界的社會運動,是「第三世界論壇」(Third World Forum)和「另類實踐世界論壇」(World Forum for Alternatives)的創始人和主席。
汪暉:清華大學人文學院教授,人文與社會科學研究所所長。
劉健芝:香港嶺南大學副教授,長期從事亞洲和第三世界的社會運動,是「另類實踐世界論壇」的副主席,與阿敏和鄔達(François Houtart)主編《抵抗的全球化》上、下冊,人民文學出版社出版。
群眾運動的成分與戰略
汪暉:薩米爾,謝謝您昨天給我的關於埃及運動的提綱。我們都非常關心埃及正在發生的事情。現在許多地區的媒體將突尼斯、埃及發生的運動與先前的中亞顏色革命相提並論,但這種說法混淆了這些運動之間的重要差別。我直觀的印象是:這是一場不同於1989年蘇東解體以來的那些親西方的、肯定資本主義體制的顏色革命的革命。當前的這場大規模民主運動不可避免地包含著對於美國全球霸權的抗議。
在那篇提綱的開頭,您指出埃及是美國控制全球的計畫的一塊基石,正由於此,美國不會容忍埃及的任何越出其全球戰略的行動,這個行動也是以色列對巴勒斯坦實行殖民統治所需要的。這也是美國要求穆巴拉克立即實行和平過渡的唯一目的。他們希望穆巴拉克任命的情報頭子蘇雷曼(Omar Souleiman)來接任,以維繫這一全球戰略的基石。您能否談談你對運動本身的看法?
阿敏:我的短文談的是對立方,即美國和埃及統治階級的戰略。很多人不瞭解這個情況。現在我想談一下群眾運動的成分與戰略。
反對力量有四個組成部分。第一,是年輕人。他們政治化,有很強的組織能力,組織動員的數目超過百萬人,這絕對不是個小數目。他們反對現有的社會與經濟制度,至於是否反對資本主義,對他們來說可能太概念化了,但是他們反對的是社會的非正義和不平等。
他們的民族主義是愛國的,是反帝國主義的。他們痛恨埃及向美國霸權屈服,因此他們也反對所謂的與以色列的和平協議,拒絕容忍以色列繼續實行對巴勒斯坦的殖民主義佔領。他們追求民主,完全反對軍隊和員警的獨裁。
他們有分散的領導班子。當他們給出示威的指令時,能動員百萬人,但是幾個小時之內,全國就有1千5百萬人回應,連小鎮和村落都動員起來。他們在全國範圍內可以即時引起強大的正面迴響。
第二個組成部分是激進左派,來自共產主義的傳統。年輕人並不反對共產黨人,但是他們不想被置於有領袖和指揮的政黨的框架裡。他們與共產黨人的關係不錯,完全沒有問題。幸虧有大規模的示威,兩者走在一起,不是誰領導誰,而是互相的配合。
資產階級民主派與穆斯林兄弟會
汪暉:也就是說,無論是青年運動還是左翼共產主義者,他們對現政權的批判、他們對民主的訴求,不僅包含著對美國霸權的抵抗,也包含著對於現行的社會、政治和經濟制度的批判。在傳統左翼與青年運動之間有著相近的傾向,不同的地方在於運動的形態,即當代運動並不希望將自身組織在政黨等高度組織化的框架內。這從運動拒絕各種組織試圖代表他們的努力中也可以看到。那麼,巴拉迪(Mohamed El Baradei)代表著怎樣的力量?
阿敏:他代表的是運動的第三個組成部分,即資產階級民主派。現制度是那麼充滿員警與黑社會的暴力,不少中產階級,包括小商人,不斷被欺淩。他們不屬於左派,他們接受資本主義、市場與商業,甚至並不完全反美;他們不擁護以色列,但是接受以色列的存在。然而,他們也是民主派,反對軍隊、員警和黑社會的權力集中。
巴拉迪是典型的資產階級民主派,信奉「真正的選舉」和尊重法制。他完全不懂經濟制度的問題,只知道正在運行的市場,卻不理解這正是社會崩潰的根源。他也不知道什麼是社會主義,可他是民主派。他在國外比在埃及更有名,但也可能快速地改變這一局面,成為轉軌過程的一個參與者。問題是,如果軍隊和情報機構不放棄對於社會的高壓統治,巴拉迪是否接受?
汪暉:巴拉迪要求的是通常所說的政治民主,而對這種政治民主到底與怎樣的社會形式相配合,他沒有看法,因為他基本接受現行的資本主義體制。在伊拉克戰爭前夕,圍繞大規模殺傷性武器的核查問題,他曾經與美國有矛盾,但並沒有另類的思想。那麼,「穆斯林兄弟會」的態度怎樣?西方媒體非常重視他們。
阿敏:穆斯林兄弟會是第四個組成部分。儘管他們在公開的政治領域有群眾的支持,但他們是極端反動的。他們不僅是宗教意識形態,而且在社會傾向上是反動的。他們公開反對工人的罷工,明確站在政權一邊。他們認為工人應該接受現行的市場。
他們也採取反對農民運動的立場。埃及有強大的中農運動,他們受到市場和富農的侵害,他們要為保留他們的財產而鬥爭。穆斯林兄弟會的立場是反對中農的,說土地所有權是私有權,說可蘭經支持市場是神聖的。
穆斯林兄弟會事實上是與政權合謀的。表面上,政權與穆斯林兄弟會是矛盾鬥爭的,但事實上他們是聯合的。國家政權給了穆斯林兄弟會三個主要的體系:教育、司法、國家電視廣播。這些都是極為重要的國家機構。通過教育,他們先是迫使學校的女孩然後是全社會戴上頭巾;通過司法,他們引入了穆斯林的律令;通過傳媒,他們影響著輿論。
穆斯林兄弟會的領導層從來是腐敗的、非常富有的政治領導層,他們一直接受沙烏地阿拉伯的金錢資助,也就是說美國的資助。他們在兩個社會階層中有重大影響,其一是親資本主義、反共產主義、害怕民眾的中產階級,這些人認為穆斯林的統治不是壞事。中產階層自發地支持穆斯林兄弟會。他們在教師、醫生、律師等專業階層中有非常大的影響力。
同時,穆斯林兄弟會從流氓階層招收他們的雇傭民兵。埃及有大規模的貧困人口,在開羅,1千5百萬人口裡面有5百萬極貧人口。穆斯林兄弟會在其中政治意識很低的窮人中找到他們能夠動員的民兵隊伍。
如果運動「成功」,「選舉」進行,穆斯林兄弟會將成為議會的主要力量。美國對此是歡迎的,並認為他們是「溫和的」。其實不過是易於駕馭而已,他們可以接受美國的戰略,讓以色列繼續佔領巴勒斯坦。穆斯林兄弟會完全認同現行的「市場」體制,對外是依附的。他們事實上是統治階級中「買辦」的同夥。
群眾要推翻的是整個制度
汪暉:穆斯林兄弟會代表著宗教性的政治力量,但按照您的分析,這種宗教性的政治力量並沒有提供關於社會和經濟體制的另類選擇,恰恰相反,宗教的政治化與市場體制的鞏固之間並沒有衝突關係。上述4個方面各有不同的取向、特徵和背景,那這幾個運動是如何走到一起的?
阿敏:事情是這樣發生的:運動由年輕人發起,激進左派立即加入,第二天資產階級民主派加入。穆斯林兄弟會在頭4天是抵制這個群眾運動的,因為他們以為員警會很快鎮壓平亂;當他們看到運動並沒有被壓下去的時候,領導層覺得不能留在外面,才參加進去。大家必須知道這個事實。
汪暉:讓我們再談談美國的戰略。您在短文中曾經提到,美國對埃及的戰略與巴基斯坦模式非常相似,就是「政治的伊斯蘭」與軍事情報系統的結合。如果再加上一句,就是全球化的資本主義市場體制。這樣一種體制能夠產生出民主嗎?
阿敏:群眾要推翻的是整個制度,不僅是穆巴拉克,但穆巴拉克是制度的象徵。穆巴拉克任命蘇雷曼為副總統之後,不到幾個小時,群眾喊的口號是:「不要穆巴拉克,不要蘇雷曼,他們兩個都是美國人。」
歐巴馬說我們需要軟過渡,就像菲律賓當年那樣。群眾說,我們要推翻的不是一個罪犯,而是所有罪犯,我們要的是真正的過渡,不要假的。群眾的政治意識很高。可是,美國的目的是軟過渡,怎麼做?就是公開地與右派、中間派、穆斯林兄弟會以至部分資產階級民主派協商,同時孤立年輕人和左派,這就是他們的戰略。
不論他們是否達成正式的協定,穆巴拉克是要出局的。副總統蘇雷曼發起所謂的協商邀請,穆斯林兄弟會很聰明,拒絕了邀請,但是他們原則上是接受與制度協商的。
美國的目的並不是民主
汪暉:但目前運動的主要力量是青年運動和更為廣泛的社會運動。工人罷工了,那是傳統左翼長期活動的區域。那麼,面對美國和埃及統治階層的這種所謂「軟過渡」策略,群眾如何反應?
阿敏:群眾運動的大會每天都在討論真正的過渡的規則:
第一:立即解散假民主的議會;
第二:立即取消戒嚴令,容許自由的集會權;
第三:開始制訂新憲法;
第四:選舉立憲議會;
第五:不要立即或者很快的選舉,而是容許一段長的自由時期。如果是立即選舉,很多人會投票給穆斯林兄弟會,因為他們有組織力、有傳媒等等。可是,如果有一年的真正自由,那麼,左派和年輕人便可以自我組織。
這是一場漫長鬥爭的開端。埃及是革命長期進行的地方。1920年到1952年的長革命時期,有進有退。長遠來說,左派和年輕人占了多數,有行動能力。可是,一個可能的壞前景是,穆斯林兄弟會和政權會用力打擊左派和年輕人,政權已經這樣做了。這個制度是非常惡毒的。在示威期間,政權打開了監獄,釋放了1萬7千名罪犯,給他們支持穆巴拉克的徽章、武器、金錢,並保證他們不會重返監獄,讓他們去襲擊示威者。示威的群眾並沒有衝擊監獄,是員警把他們釋放的。
汪暉:社會運動提出的口號之一,是要求建立一個文職政府(civil government),即這個政府既不能是軍人的政府,也不能是宗教政府。這也正是「civil」這一語詞的真正含義。
從策略上說,運動需要一定的準備時期,在廣泛動員和參與的基礎上,形成自身的綱領和代表人物,以便直接介入大規模運動之後的政治進程。
穆巴拉克的員警專制,使得埃及社會缺乏政治空間,除了轉入地下的共產黨和穆斯林兄弟會之外,社會處於一種「去政治化」的狀態。現在的任務是「重新政治化」,也正處於「重新政治化」的過程之中。
「去政治化」既是穆巴拉克體制垮台的原因,也是今天社會運動面臨的困難。如果「軟過渡」策略部分奏效,即穆巴拉克下台,由軍方和員警力量支撐,群眾運動能否持續並形成更為清晰的目標,就成了一個最重要的挑戰。
您認為年輕人是支持左派的,但可能右派和穆斯林兄弟會也會試圖分化年輕人。最重要的是年輕人和民主派不支持美國。民主派會怎樣,他們能夠提出什麼目標嗎?
阿敏:很多民主派是中立的,並不反美。巴拉迪很天真,以為美國支持民主。我們不斷強調的是,美國的目的並不是民主。
■埃及軍方高層將領在電視上發表完致詞後,開羅解放廣場上的群眾高聲歡呼慶祝,圖攝於2月10日。(圖文/路透)
農民在運動中的角色
劉健芝:傳統左派運動與工人之間有密切關係。工人起了什麼作用?
阿敏:3年前,一個罷工浪潮橫掃埃及,那是50年以來非洲大陸(包括南非)最強大的工人運動。從納塞時期開始,官方的工會完全被國家政權控制,就像蘇聯的國家控制工會的模式。因此,罷工不是由工會領導層發動的,而是由基層發起的。在這個意義上,罷工是自發的,取得了重大的勝利。
3年前,政權就想調動員警鎮壓,但是資方覺得不行,怕把工廠都毀了。於是他們進行協商,罷工工人贏得的工資增長並不多,只有10%或5%,連通貨膨脹吃掉的都追不上,可是,他們贏得了很重要的成果,就是尊嚴和工會權利,譬如說,解雇工人要有工會認可。他們接著成立了新的獨立工會,這次也參加了運動。
劉健芝:農民在運動中的角色如何?
阿敏:相對而言,農民運動很難串聯。農民運動從1920年以來一直很激進,他們要反對的既有大地主,也有富農。富農在農村社會裡勢力很強,他們不像地主那樣不在地生活,他們跟政府、律師、醫生都有密切的關係。另外的是中農、貧農、赤貧農和無地農民。
無地農民的狀況在過去30年並沒有惡化,因為他們出去海灣國家打工,賺了一點小錢,回來不夠買地,但夠他們在灰色經濟裡面做些小生意。赤貧的農民最受剝奪,因為新自由主義的市場讓他們任由富農、新資產階級地主和現代的埃及農業企業剝奪。赤貧農民最為激進,並不反對共產主義者,但是他們不知道什麼是共產主義。他們就是不知道。
汪暉:傳統左翼和共產主義運動在工人中影響很大。但對於農民,埃及的共產主義者的影響如何?
阿敏:共產主義者的不足,是一直沒有去團結農民。然則,唯一去跟他們討論的只有共產主義者,沒有穆斯林兄弟會,沒有資產階級民主派。可是,雖然沒有人刻意團結農民,他們卻繼續進行他們的鬥爭。
汪暉:在廣大的第三世界國家,農民的動員和角色始終是重要的一環。農民有沒有參加近期的動員?
阿敏:農民在農村有動員,但是沒有跟大運動連接。他們沒有參與討論過渡的民眾大會。
汪暉:運動是否主要是城市的?
阿敏:主要在城市,小城鎮也有。
反抗資本全球化的性質
汪暉:埃及的運動帶有強烈的自發性,不同的力量突然地加入到這場聲勢浩大的運動之中。這個運動與20世紀以政黨政治為動員機制的大眾運動十分不同,也不同於單純的階級運動,儘管工人階級和傳統左翼也是這場運動的重要的參與者。運動開始之後,許多政治組織和機會主義者試圖代表運動出來與政府談判,但大眾運動拒絕他們的代表性。您怎麼解釋運動的自發性?
阿敏:民眾對現制度、對員警都極為厭倦了。如果你只因很小的問題(例如闖紅燈)被逮捕,你會被毒打,被折磨。員警施加日常的鎮壓欺淩,完全無法無天,醜惡無比。民眾也厭倦了黑社會制度。世界銀行所說的代表未來的銀行家,是強盜流氓。他們怎麼累積財富的?是通過國家無償給他們土地,他們轉賣給地產商。這是巧取豪奪來累積的財富。他們把真正的企業家擠壓走了。
民眾也厭倦了美國的霸權。埃及人是民族主義愛國者。我們會問:我們怎麼可能這麼卑微,每天每個事情都由美國領事和美國總統來獨裁決定?另外,還有社會的衰敗,大多數人面對的是不斷惡化的失業和貧苦,社會不平等極為嚴重。所有這些加起來的不滿,讓政府徹底失去合法性。民眾說,夠了!忽然就爆炸了。有人因此犧牲了,但是他們知道,如果你參加鬥爭,你是可能犧牲的。
劉健芝:民眾的厭倦是長期的厭倦,忽然就爆炸,來自兩個當前的危機,一是高物價,二是高等教育青年的高失業率。民眾運動怎麼解決這兩個問題?
阿敏:這些問題都是資本主義危機造成的,因此,這次運動才帶有反抗資本主義全球化的性質。這正是要從根本上去解決危機問題。只要這場大眾的民主運動能夠獲得成功,民眾就會推進真正的社會經濟進步,化解這些危機。
汪暉:沙達特在美國支持下與以色列單獨媾和。過去30年,阿拉伯世界是分裂的。埃及作為阿拉伯世界的領頭羊,對於阿拉伯世界有過重大影響。儘管穆巴拉克在巴勒斯坦和以色列的和談中扮演特殊角色,但埃及的國際影響,尤其是在阿拉伯世界中的影響,實際上下降了。
昨天跟一位埃及朋友聊天,他對目前運動感到興奮──世界終於重新認識到埃及是一個多麼重要的國家!阿拉伯世界的格局十分複雜和微妙,其中最有影響的國家是那些親美的、接受現行資本主義體制的專制國家。那麼,埃及這場運動對阿拉伯世界的團結、對於阿拉伯世界內部的社會運動會有什麼影響?
阿敏:會引起迴響,但每個國家是不同的。突尼斯國家小,教育水準和生活水準都比較高,但是因為它小,在全球經濟裡面,它很脆弱。
汪暉:好像突尼斯的民眾組織更好,埃及群眾更為自發。對巴勒斯坦肯定會有影響吧?
阿敏:肯定是的。對敘利亞也有衝擊,那兒的情況很複雜。我們很難知道對伊拉克的影響是怎麼樣。南葉門是民族主義、民粹主義左派,帶有馬克思主義的修辭,有某種激進左派的思想。但它也像南北朝鮮,北方落後南方發達。葉門有可能再分裂,因為南方不能接受統一。
■人民聽到穆巴拉克下台時,熱淚盈眶。(圖╱Islam El Azzazi攝影團隊提供)
群眾大會尋找新憲法理念
(以下是2月13日穆巴拉克下台後通過電話所做的補充訪談)
劉健芝:穆巴拉克下台了,您對最新的發展有什麼評論?
阿敏:首先,穆巴拉克沒有辭職,他是給武裝部隊最高委員會的政變趕走的。他跟他的副總統蘇雷曼都被趕走了。新的軍隊領導層聲稱它會執政,一直到新選舉舉行之後,然後,軍隊會返回軍營。軍隊說在這個期間,它會處理過渡。
但是,群眾運動大會繼續工作,第一,推進新民主,要求所有公民的自由權利,例如集社自由、傳媒權利等等。第二,群眾運動大會將尋找新憲法的理念,俾使選舉的是立憲議會而不是立法議會,儘管政府想做的是部分修改現行憲法。
現在要知道新政府會怎麼樣處理情況,還言之尚早。再多等幾天,情況就會明朗。群眾運動還沒有完成它的工作。軍隊領導層希望有一個強過渡,推進選舉,穆斯林兄弟會將會取得多數。我們希望選舉前有一個緩過渡,以讓新的政治、民主力量可以組織起來,可以發展它們的綱領和工作,並能跟社會公眾有交流。
汪暉:這也許是這場運動能否成為一場真正的革命的關鍵。廣泛的社會運動只有通過大會的形式才能形成自己的綱領和領導層,參與制憲過程,而現成的形式民主框架,很可能導致在前政權下已經存在的組織,如穆斯林兄弟會或軍方推薦的人物,佔據議會和權力的中心──事實上,穆巴拉克政權也有某種民主形式,但它的代議制和選舉制不具有代表性,而是專斷的政治形式。一個通過大眾民主而產生的真正的civil government能否成型,是未來埃及政治走向的關鍵。這對今天埃及青年運動、工人運動和進步組織是一個真正的挑戰。
(本文經汪暉與劉健芝校正,並全文交由《新國際》發表)
2011年2月12日 星期六
A Mission to Die For - Atta's Odyssey
從突尼西亞的失業自焚青年Mohamed Bouazizi,到開羅解放廣場無數在抗爭中死亡的無名青年,不禁讓人想起10年前那個同樣選擇最激烈絕決的手段去解決社會公義的埃及青年Mohamed Atta,重新閱讀當年的主流媒體報導和他兩位漢堡科技大學都市計畫學系同學的訪談,感慨無限。
source: TIME news by John Cloud Sunday, Sept. 30, 2001
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,176917-1,00.html
Before we get to his dislikes and disorders, his vexations as a child and his entanglements as an adult, let's poke inside Mohamed Atta's brain the night before he helped slaughter 7,000 people. "You have to remind yourself to listen and obey that night, for you will face situations that will require your obedience 100 percent," reads a letter found in Atta's luggage and in the belongings of two other hijackers. Atta would be happy to know that his evil was steadfast.
Though investigators are still excavating the hidden trails that led to Sept. 11, many point to Atta as the linchpin of the 19-man hijacking gang. From Hamburg, Germany, to South Florida to Las Vegas, Atta crossed paths with at least seven other hijackers. While some of these terrorists were barely out of their teens, Atta turned 33 days before the attacks. He seems to have been the center of gravity, the dour and meticulous ringleader. This is the story of how his malevolence was unleashed.
In Egypt, where Atta grew up, his family and friends describe a shy, unassuming young man who struggled to make his mark. They say he must have undergone a stark personality change to become the terrorist who supervised Sept. 11. Born in Kafr El Sheikh, a city on the Nile delta, Mohamed was the son of a lawyer and a homemaker. As a kid, his father says, he liked to play chess and disliked violent games. He was a scrawny youth--only 5 ft. 7 in. and until recently quite thin. (His dad called him "Bolbol," Arabic slang for a little singing bird.) Atta seemed overshadowed by his two sisters, who rose to become a zoology professor and a medical doctor. Atta graduated from Cairo University with a degree in architectural engineering and was an average student, according to his peers.
Atta made a few friends in school, but he was such a loner that when a classmate, Iman Ismail, drew a caricature of their class, she depicted Mohamed standing next to a sign posted on Egyptian military fences: COMING NEAR OR TAKING PHOTOS PROHIBITED. When it came to politics and religion, topics no Egyptian can avoid, he offered mainstream opinions. His friends don't remember ever seeing him pray, and they recall his harsh words for Islamic terrorists--"brainless, irresponsible people."
Which is why several of his Egyptian classmates could not accept his guilt in interviews with TIME. "I could never imagine him on a plane threatening people, killing people," says Ahmed Khalifa, 33, Atta's best friend at Cairo University. "He would be scared to death... He was not a leader. He had his opinion, but he was modest in everything. His emotions were steady, and he was not easily influenced or swayed. Mohamed was well liked because he never offended or bothered anyone." Says Ismail: "He was good to the roots."
But he had what could be interpreted as some ominous undercurrents. Atta could get exercised by the world's shortcomings, big and small. He spoke out impulsively against injustice. He was so sensitive that he could become emotional if an insect was killed. "He was a little bit pure," says Khaled Kattan, another classmate. "If he thought that I said or did something wrong, then he would say that in front of anybody."
Atta's father could be quite strict, according to friends. In interviews since Sept. 11, Mohammed El Amir, has denied that his son was involved in the attacks. "He is a moderate in his adherence to his faith like me and his mother," El Amir has said. But El Amir's politics suggest that Atta learned a few things about the world from his father. In a press conference last week, El Amir heatedly blamed the Israelis for the attacks and called the U.S. "the root of terrorism."
Cairo is one of the world's most crowded, impoverished cities, and by the early '90s, Atta felt the intense pressures on middle-class Egyptians not to slip in social rank. His friend Khalifa says Atta grew frustrated because he was unable to fulfill his academic ambitions in his homeland. He believed that political favoritism at Egyptian universities would keep him from the top spots.
So in autumn 1992, Atta enrolled at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, in a sleepy corner of northern Germany. He hoped to earn a degree in urban planning and then return to Egypt. In 1993, he befriended fellow student Volker Hauth, and the two often traveled and studied together in the next few years. Hauth liked Atta but sensed a rigidity in his friend. "I knew Mohamed as a guy searching for justice," Hauth told the Los Angeles Times. "He felt offended by this broad wrong direction the world was taking."
In the mid-'90s, Atta began disappearing from school for extended periods. He would tell his thesis adviser that he was going to Aleppo, Syria, to work on his thesis. (It explored the conflict between Islam and modernity as reflected in the city's planning, and it won high marks when completed in August 1999.) Atta was away from his job at a Hamburg consultancy for months in 1995; he reportedly said he had gone on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Co-workers recall him condemning terrorist attacks on tourists in Egypt. But he also bemoaned Western influence--specifically, the rise of skyscrapers--in Arab cities.
From mid-1997 to October 1998, Atta seems to have disappeared from Hamburg entirely. He told his thesis adviser that he was gone for family reasons, but it's clear that he underwent profound changes during this time. He returned to school with the bushy beard favored by fundamentalists. He was more serious. Hauth, who left the university at the end of 1995 and lost contact with Atta, told the London Observer his friend could laugh at jokes about Arab dictators. But Chrilla Wendt, who knew Atta after he returned, said she couldn't remember him smiling.
Atta had grown more sullen about his life prospects. His old friend Khalifa ran into him on a Cairo street one day in 1999. He found Atta depressed about not having a career or a family back home. Atta said he had made few German friends. "I think he felt that he had just been studying all those years," Khalifa recalls. "When I said goodbye, I was sad."
German authorities now believe that sometime that year, Atta began touching base with a wide range of people connected to terrorism. They point to his association with a Syrian businessman, Mamoun Darkazanli, who had power of attorney for a German bank account in the name of a man thought to be Osama bin Laden's finance chief. Darkazanli denied any ties to terrorists last week.
Whatever Atta was doing behind the scenes, he was publicly spreading the word of the Koran. Early in 1999, university officials gave him permission to found an Islamic student group. (Investigators believe he eventually met hijackers Marwan Al-Shehhi and Ziad Samir Jarrah in the group.) The 40 or so members gathered to pray every day. The moderate boy from the outskirts of Cairo had grown devout, and he was surrounding himself with like-minded compatriots.
At the end of 1999, Atta, Al-Shehhi and Jarrah reported their passports stolen, possibly to clear any record of travel to Afghanistan. Within weeks, Atta and Al-Shehhi flew to the U.S. for a visit. Even at this early date, Atta may have been planning an air attack. Sometime in spring 2000, Atta--now a clean-shaven cartoon version of an American in Tommy Hilfiger and heavy cologne--walked into a U.S. Department of Agriculture office in Homestead, Fla., and inquired about loans for buying crop dusters. The office doesn't offer such loans, and it turned him away.
Atta returned briefly to Europe, but on June 3, 2000, he arrived in Newark, N.J., from Prague with a six-month tourist visa. Within a month, Atta and Al-Shehhi signed up for flight training at Huffman Aviation International in Venice, Fla. When the two men moved into a little pink house in nearby Nokomis, they brought sweets to their rental agent. Their Venice landlady, Dru Voss, says that while Al-Shehhi was a likable guy, Atta was an icicle who never looked her in the eye.
Atta and Al-Shehhi were eager students. Together they paid Huffman some $40,000 for about four months of training. Huffman owner Rudi Dekkers took an immediate dislike to Atta, the smaller man. Dekkers recalls that Atta once told him he had lived in Germany. Dekkers then launched into German, but Atta just turned away. Neither Atta nor Al-Shehhi socialized with the other 15 to 20 students.
Atta's tourist visa expired on Dec. 3, 2000, but no one seemed to notice (one of several lapses in immigration procedures that aided the hijackers). On Dec. 21, Atta and Al-Shehhi got their pilot licenses. About a week later, they trained for three hours each on the Boeing 727 simulator at Simcenter Inc. at Opa-Locka Airport, outside Miami. By that time, the two men, who called themselves cousins, had each logged about 300 hours of flying time. They were still beginners, but they knew enough to maneuver an airborne plane.
Around this time Atta and other hijackers purchased global-positioning devices known as GPS-3s from Tropic-Aero, an aviation-supply shop in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. These $475 devices, about the size of Game Boys, are used by pilots to navigate. Says Jerry Carbone, Tropic-Aero's president: "It's so simple to use, you and your wife would be able to find your way in a 767 once it's up. It's sad if [the hijackers] were able to use something anyone can get at K Mart."
In January of this year, Atta hopped a flight from Miami to Madrid. It's unclear why he went, and when he returned to Miami International Airport on Jan. 10, he was allowed back in the country despite his expired visa. He didn't bother to list his flight or carrier, yet sailed through immigration. The next month, Atta and Al-Shehhi rented a single-engine Piper Warrior from a Gwinnett County, Ga., flight school. Like many other pilots, they were honing their skills. Atta inquired again about crop dusters--this time in Belle Glade, Fla. He and some men with him wanted to know how much fuel and chemicals the yellow 502 Air Tractors could carry and whether special skills were needed to pilot them.
On April 26, Broward County sheriff's deputy Josh Strambaugh stopped Atta for a traffic violation. Atta didn't have his license with him and was given a citation. He did not show up for his hearing, and on June 4 a warrant was issued for his arrest. But it was too late. By this time, Atta and his men were moving every couple of months, drifting from one low-rent dwelling to the next. Nearing the final stages of their plotting, they had become very careful. They kept to themselves and seem not to have even attended a mosque. Only occasionally would somebody notice them. One observer was Jim Woolard, owner of a World Gym in Delray Beach, Fla., who recalls Atta as "driven" on the weight machines (perhaps one reason that the folks back home would have trouble recognizing the newly beefy Atta in photos released after Sept. 11).
On June 29, Atta traveled to Las Vegas, where he stayed in a cheap room, with the DO NOT DISTURB SIGN constantly dangling from the door. While in town, investigators told the Associated Press, he met with two other hijackers, Salem Alhazmi and Hani Hanjour. His Hamburg pals Al-Shehhi and Jarrah were also there, which suggests a planning session. Four of the five men were on separate flights on Sept. 11, and one theory is that the four leaders of the four hijacked planes were there to work out final details.
On July 9, Atta made another trip to Madrid. He spent 10 days in Spain, running up 1,250 miles on his rental car. His time there remains murky, but last week six men suspected of belonging to a group financed by bin Laden were arrested in Spain on charges unrelated to Sept. 11. Investigators are tracing Atta's steps to see whether he met with them.
Atta returned to the U.S. on a business visa. He made another quick trip to Las Vegas but spent most of his time in Florida. Sources have told TIME that in the 10 days before Sept. 11, Atta received at least two wire transfers of money from a man investigators have linked with bin Laden. But the last days weren't all business. On Sept. 7, Atta, Al-Shehhi and another man visited Shuckum's Oyster Bar and Grill in Hollywood, Fla. Contrary to earlier reports of his carousing, Atta was the only one of the three who didn't drink alcohol. Instead, he downed cranberry juice all night, sugary fuel for the pinball machine--Golden Tee '97--that he played for 3 1/2 hours.
When Atta brought hell to the north tower of the World Trade Center, when he perished in the flames and had his picture beamed around the world, friends back in Egypt were dumbfounded. They looked and looked again at the photos, trying to find the kid they once knew. "To fly a plane, what a joke! Mohamed could hardly ride a bike," says classmate Osama Abul Enein. "He came from an average middle-class background. Mohamed no way could have done that," agrees Ibrahim Salah, 33, a Cairo engineer who knew him in college.
But he did. How does someone change so much? Experts point out that extremist groups in the Muslim world have been attracting an increasing number of recruits who grew up comfortably. "Just because you are educated and travel does not mean that you cannot join a militant organization," says Hala Mostafa, an authority on militant groups at al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. "Terrorists should be illiterate or primitive? Not so."
Which still doesn't explain what happened to Mohamed Atta. "Let each find his blade for the prey to be slaughtered," reads a passage of the letter found in Atta's luggage. How Atta found his blade may never be known.
Ralph Bodenstein Interview
Beirut, Monday 15 October, 2001
source: Four Corners, Monday 12 November, 2001 ABC TV
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/atta/interviews/bodenstein.htm
Liz Jackson interviews Ralph Bodenstein who studied urban planning with Mohamed Atta at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harbug. He met him in 1994, when they, along with Volker Hauth, began working on a project in Cairo that was sponsored by the German government.
When did you first meet Mohamed?
Well I met him first at the end of 1994, he was studying in Hamburg…together with a colleague of his, Volker Hauth and they had prepared a project which was research to be done on plannings to be implemented or planned at least in the historic core of Cairo on the effects of traffic plannings and urban plannings on the social and urban situation and they had presented this project as a project for…a sort of non-governmental organisation but a big one who are very much interested in the exchange of scientists and of scholars that should be on the one hand between the US and Germany, on the other hand between Germany and third world countries and the program we were in was actually this program for the Third World countries which was sort of development politics program therefore, trainee program actually for young people from Germany to go into Third Eorld countries and to work with MDOs there and stuff like that so Volker Hauth and Mohamed El-Amir as he was called by then had developed this idea to make this project where they were looking for a third person to actually to come with them and I joined them in because I was doing Middle Eastern studies, urbanism and history of Islamic art.
I was studying it in Bonn actually so I joined them…and we did the preparation course together. This was actually the end of ’94 and went on until summer '95 and in August '95 we all left together for a three month field research period in Cairo.
So you worked together for about nine months?
I mean we went, you see these preparation courses they were just like a prolonged weekend every two months…like it was the first in December and then there was another one in February, another one in May something like that so it was only three courses. This is where we met for some days and we really were together then actually in Cairo for the first three months.
Tell us about the work in Cairo.
On the one hand we had to do field research on the ground in the … old town of Cairo, actually a specific area, all the area north of University, this is where we were working on, which are the northern city gates of historic Cairo and we were doing field research there actually on the economy on the ground. So actually what sort of craft and industry was there, of the traffic that was actually necessarily to supply them and to to get away the stuff they could use on the traffic actually of planes that were coming and going because it is not only a tourist site. Actually it's only the smallest part of Cairo which is really has been discovered by the tourist. The other part is just too far off or it's too popular actually for tourists to go there and we were mostly in these areas and … visiting factories and on the other hand we visited several planning offices as well from the municipality and the other state as well as private planning companies who were working for different projects of the state or of the municipality, and we looked at what they were actually planning in order to resolve problems; what problems did they actually see and how did they face them and deal with them. We tried to analyse actually the effects of these planning systems that were implemented on the existing social and economic structures and material structure of the story core.
What did Mohamed think about the kinds of plans that that the Egyptian Government or the tourist office had in mind for that particular area?
You see it's a little bit ambivalent to give a general judgment on that, because on the one hand there was this problem actually, of that there were many plans which just dealt with the issues in the interest of enforcing tourism in Cairo because one of the main state incomes actually for Egypt is the money which comes in from tourists, and so they pretty much concentrate on fostering tourism in Cairo as well which until then was not such a favourite place for tourists to stay so all these plans were pretty much concentrating on how to improve the situation for tourists and they did this by means of slowing the factories and the small scale industry which was there in the inner city and also by changing the physical environment like tearing down houses and trying to reconstruct historical structures that had been there before, now on the other hand you have the problem that these industries were also not in favour of the historical structures because if you've got aluminium factories in the city they only came there twenty years before. Before that they hadn't been there so they actually they just went in because it was a cheap place to set up a factory and it was central so you could easily deliver your clients to different parts of Cairo which made it actually a very important economic area which was cheap concerning rents and places but it was very effective in terms of space, and this was not in favour of historical monuments in the area. But on the other hand, many of the population, most of the people living there they were depending on these economic structures: they were working there and living there and it was very close for them so they had no transport costs… essential was the very low wages people are paid in Egypt so they were really depending on the fact that they did not have to come and go from a suburb to and from Cairo and paying buses and micro buses fees but they could just go walking or take a bicycle. So that was actually the general dilemma which every planning was facing there but what happened was that most of the plans that we dealt with and that we found were completely neglecting the social problem by just sending the people away and that's it. I mean they did not try and find other solutions for them. It was like clearing the space off of this industry, of the people and make it nicer for the tourists and so naturally I mean it wasn't only Mohamed but also Volker Hauth and me were very negative about this way of dealing with with the people living in the city …
What did he say to you about it?
We were discussing all this issues and he was naturally saying that he was aware of the fact, that actually these industries were not good for the historical city core but on the other hand [look at the] social programs if you were really to take people to other places, you should also create work for them in these places which certainly did not work, they did not do this and so he would have preferred to only bring out the most dangerous or the most problematic industries which had the highest pollution rates and to keep the other small industries which just had high noise emissions which were not so problematic actually and that was rather the more moderate approach that he would have voted for, but it was not in the plans. But they also wanted to break through … into the city core so they would ease the traffic flow and with this, this would have also brought down lots of historical structures. Mostly what we talk about is buildings from the 18th and 19th century which were still standing there and which when actually compared to a… mosque from the 14th century is not considered to be a valuable structure, and so then it's just brought down and that was also very problematic because we found that this would only increase the traffic flow in certain areas but it will not stop people from going there so it would just relocate the problem but not really solve it.
So when you talked amongst yourselves what was his feeling and your feeling about the way the Egyptian Government viewed those people who lived in that area and what importance should be placed on their right to live and work.
Yeah I mean he was criticising this complete ignorance of the social problems… because he was much more in favour of a more social approach to such an area in general in urban planning- that was one thing. On the other hand he also had a very strong interest in preserving the historical architectural structures which were witness to the history of one of the capital cities of the Islamic empires…. different centuries and has very beautiful and excellent architecture actually. It's extraordinary, actually it has changed a bit now but at that time it hadn't been really taken care of. There was more money put into excavating sites instead of renovating mosques and so there naturally was a need to do it and he was also pretty much in favour of that solution to preserve the city as it was actually grown and had grown throughout the centuries and to stop it from being completely transformed by houses like 19th century houses being brought down and high rises being built because this was what was going on. He was also very interested in the aspect of the rent, of these contracts, because of the fact that the rents hadn't been written for several decades, because there were several laws for renting, but the fact that the people living inside the houses they would not have the money to take care for a house and the owner wouldn't have it either because the income he got from the rent wasn't high enough; so the owners have an interest to let the houses run down and they did sometimes on purpose, so that the people would have to leave because the house was in such a bad state that you could not live there any longer. So they let water run down the walls for example and there was a war going on between between lease holders and renters of the houses and Mohamed was thinking about ways of finding ways of changing the laws for renting houses in order to improve the situation as well for the house owners as for the people living in them.
Do you think it's fair to say he had a strong sense of social justice?
Well yeah it was very very strong. It was a very obvious strong sense of justice yeah.
In terms of…?
Well in terms of that it was very critical on the high class approach you know the classes in Egypt they are I mean the people were well off they do not care for the daily problems of the poor people and there are many poor people in Egypt, especially in Cairo and he was interested in finding ways to give them a better life or to organise the city in the space in a way and also social structure in a way that these people would do better actually.
And how did he feel the Government was dealing with those issues?
Well the Government was dealing with it terms of self-interest. I mean the Government was dealing it in terms of profit which was naturally the state profit in tourism which was very important. The Government was dealing with it also in terms of probably rather traditional neglect of the popular interests actually and so there was no… you couldn't see at that time an attempt of the Government to seriously solve these sorts of problems. They were just trying to relocate them and to make things better for their own income and Mohamed was very critical of this and this was actually linked to a strong critics of the Government in not really taking an interest in the own people's fate anyway but just in their own … interest in their own political career and in their financial enrichment and for this they would like just to cooperate with anybody and there was also naturally the link to critics of the Egyptian Government working out, cooperating directly with the US.
Can I ask you about that specifically then. Did he talk to you about a concern about how close the Egyptian Government had become in terms of their interests and the interests of the United States?
Yeah I mean we had several talks on that and it was not only on a political scale that he was arguing against this approach of the US Government's political and financial influence in general in Egypt, it was also on a cultural level actually that he was objecting this.
What do you mean on a cultural level?
I mean they work differently in Cairo then they do for instance in Washington and there were actually always conflicts of interest because there were also people that were Americanised in Cairo and these were probably the elites because they went to the American University in Cairo and Mohamed was very critical of these people because he felt that … he was pretty right about this that they were very much …Alienated actually …
Alienated from…
Alienated from the general Egyptian public because they were a very small group but they were very influential and they were actually strongly pro American and dependent on American financing and trying to live in America and coming back and there was this sort of…
…cultural imperialism sort of…
Yeah but this was not only like imperialism the way that… Egyptians who were working for this, you see I mean. Cultural imperialism is not that one side … was presented. There were always local elites whose interest it is to strengthen this influence. So he was critical of this and there was this other history of the politics of when already Egypt opened to a strongly western influence and they had a liberalisation of the markets and they went away from the most socialist economic approach … and he was also critical of this because he thought that this sort of market capitalism was not a good solution for a country, as Egypt has a very big population and poor population would not have the means to afford everything in the market could offer…
He was opposed to the adoption of a more free-market capitalist approach that Egypt had taken?
Well I mean no, he was opposed to it and he was also pointing to details of it. For instance they were producing….strawberries. They were producing strawberries on the Egyptian fields which were not produced for the Egyptian market and were exported to Europe for instance, while at the same time they would have to import food for their own people, like wheat from the US, which he considered absurd. You know there was the old country being used for producing high class luxury products for foreign markets and then they had to again import nutrition from other countries at a certain price again actually to nutrify their own population. It was completely absurd.
And he talked to you about this?
Yeah I mean we were discussing this as well. I mean at a certain point I could point to this problem and he was upset about it actually. He considered it grotesque to do something like that.
Why grotesque?
Yeah because you see it would be much more logical to cultivate wheat in your fields instead of cultivating strawberries there which nobody can afford in Egypt anyway…
At the time that you were there, well both the decade before that but during the time that you went to Egypt there was a very heavy crack down from the Egyptian Government on Islamic groups…
Was that something you talked about at all?
I only remember that we, I think we had a talk on that of which I do not remember many details. It was a very short [conversation] but apparently Mohamed had also talked before that with Volker Hauth about this problem while this thing was going on, and both Mohamed and Volker Hauth were very critical actually about this, because it was very rude military action they were taking. They were really storming different parts of the Cairo city in order to fight different extremist groups, which was a sort sort of street war going on… a crack down. There was lots of troops being involved and I mean this is something you can only find scary when this… and he was also critical of that naturally because I mean he was though in favour of extremist Islamic groups but he was pretty much against such a state action against people who are apparently working in favour of the interests of the people living in the streets so it was always a social conflict … you see because it was these people in these extremist groups in these quarters they were working they were also like taking care of the social needs of the people which the State did not cope with.
And that's the reason he thought it was wrong of the government to crack down on them because they were providing social services?
Yeah because they would not replace these services by anything, by any other services so they would just crack down on the organisations and that's it.
Did he strike you as a passionate person?
Well he was in a way yeah, he was passionate but at the same time he was very, he was calm so he was a serious and calm person but when he got upset about something he became passionate.
What made him most passionate?
Well at that time I remember there were two things made him passionate. One was actually the ongoing war in Yugoslavia, the Bosnian War especially which he considered a war actually of one population against the Muslim part of the population and he didn't understand why there was no help by the so called International community to prevent this murdering from going on, and this he was always linking to the war going on or the process going on in which he was very critical of because he considered it selling out of the interests of the Palestinian people as what had happened in Oslo. And he also links it to what had happened during the second Gulf War when the International lines attacked Saddam Hussein and which he was not in favour of Saddam Hussein. That was very clear because he considered Saddam Hussein also a politician but he was not in favour of his people in any way but he would not understand, he was very very angry about the fact that the international community would gather in order to attack Saddam Hussein but they would not gather in order to prevent the Israelis attacking Palestinians. They would not gather for any other problem as the one in Yugoslavia he was very afraid that there was a very strong bias in these politics and that these politics were always in the interests actually of the US and he was very critical of that, and I mean he also criticised the UN of being a sort of organisation which would always at the end of the day would only do what the US would ask for and not, never do anything against the US or against Israel.
When you said there were two things, was that the second thing?
Well the one thing was the US influence actually in the Middle East, the other thing was the Yugoslavian civil war and these were very hot topics he'd get upset about.
Did you think of him as a particularly religious person?
He was very religious as many others are in Cairo so he was particularly religious in terms of people I know and also of friends I use to have later on in Cairo though I had some more actually who were also as religious but not… in another way then so he was, he was very religious. He prayed five times a day and he used to listen to on the radio or on the cassette and but that was actually something very normal. I met many other people who were very similar to him then … then I met him in '94 he wasn't as religious as he had become in summer '95 already as far as I can observe it looking back.
What you felt he had changed just in that period of time he'd become more religious?
Yeah it had become more obvious, he would more show it towards the outside that he was religious.
How could you see that?
I mean firstly he had grown his beard by these days actually which later he apparently shaved again but as he came back he had grown a beard which we are more or less supposed to do …because you're not allowed to shave. He kept this beard for some months later on which is also quite, quite usual for these people to do and well he was so in this course, in how he talked about… religion to me, but this might not have been that he had become more religious, but maybe we just got to know each other better. So he started to talk with me more confidently on these matters actually and we had several discussions on religion because he had a very very conservative approach to Islam which is not unusual I mean considering what you are teached in the State school system in Egypt and he was always very shocked when… I was interested in Islam as one of many different cultures existing on the planet and I was also trying to compare phenomena in one religion and the other and he was always upset at certain things, which words I used actually which were not appropriate in the proper Islamic diction so I was not allowed to say it this way because then it would be wronged. It would be sinned if it would be this way. It was for instance when I said that it is interesting that you have ways of speaking, uttering only texts which if you look at [ceremonies like] in the Catholic Church when you have this way of pronouncing in a certain melody, and you have it in Judaism and prayer and you have it also in other religions and you have it in Islam… and when you read Koran you have a certain… I mean the way you read Koran, which is something like singing. Well I made the mistake to say singing and then he got really upset and because naturally singing is not allowed in his interpretation of… because music's something sinful in order to distract people from the right path and so …
So when you …
Singing would have been a sin already and you can't sing Koran and it was these things we were discussing and for him I was a sort of person he could confront because I was a sort of example …because I was a European, a German who had studied Middle Eastern studies and Islamic studies and so I was for him an example of somebody who approached another culture but did not really understand what was going on, because I said it in the wrong way and he always felt the urge to explain it how it was to be understood so I could understand his point of view but still scientifically it was not mine you see and so we never found a common ground on these.
Do you think that he resented the way that western culture for the most part does not understand Islam?
Yeah I mean that was one of his basic problems I think and that made things also very difficult for him in the long run to live in Hamburg because as religious and conservative in his religion as he was, it was difficult for him to communicate to other people who would not know enough actually about these issues and so there was a lack of of exchange I think and so he necessarily had to become more secluded on these issues I think when living in Hamburg and I think he was suffering from this because he felt really alienated…from his surrounding.
And do you think in a way, do you think he resented it and felt that the West doesn't make the effort to understand?
I mean he was very explicit about that, I mean they deliberately did not want to understand. That was his interpretation rather because it they had a certain interest, when there was a interest in the Middle East it was of political or financial interest and it was not about an equal or balanced exchange, so it was something like knowledge in order to gain power not knowledge in order to understand which was pretty close to imperial studies…. I mean, he was aware of this but he being very conservative and also a sort of essentialist from his side. This is what I was criticising on him because I realised that he was sometimes taking the constructs which were actually constructed by, for instance, Orientalists and was now saying that this was typical Islam whereas in the meantime it was much more critically viewed already in within scholarly approaches to Islamic studies because they had found out actually that … I mean it was only [the] picture they had constructed, and [they] had not considered all the different aspects that were there, so I was critical about his approach that he had this sort of moralistic approach to Islam. So Islam for him was one thing and not something with many different opportunities and options to act and to create culture.
What particular aspects of conservative Islam stood out for you in terms of that critique that you're saying you had of…
Well I mean for instance when we come back to the urban planning thing he was … of the idea of an Islamic city and also of an Islamic house which is a construct of Orientalists from the 19th and 20th century and he considered actually the ideal Islamic city to have things like like narrow dead end roads that have court yard houses and all this which you might find in one city, not find in another. You might even find it in all Islamic cities so you see if the question, if it's really Islamic or if it is a result of some much more complex cultural historical development.
But he wanted cities to be this idea of Islamic?
Yeah this was the idea of Islam and he even would have favoured to recreate these spaces so he was also in favour of these attempts in Saudi Arabia to build Islamic cities where they would have modern architecture but with courtyards and dead end roads so they would build new Islamic cities, which structurally and socially, naturally were not Islamic cities as old because Islamic cities were much more self organising then central so it was odd to do it this way.
And structurally now, it would be very difficult to achieve and not particularly good to live in.
Exactly I mean this for him was a task that could be solved by architects and by urban planners so naturally he knew that there were problems about this but it was something he was eager to work on. I mean this was one of his interests because he considered this city more appropriate for the people and for their daily life culture to live in.
Was there anything about your lifestyle that offended him?
No I mean he was he was very tolerant of this because he accepted that I was not an Egyptian nor a Muslim so I wasn't and he had nothing to complain about in general because in Egypt otherwise I behaved, I adopted to manners so there was no strong conflict actually. There were no proper critics actually of my behaviour.
Did you… I wasn't suggesting you'd done anything in particular by the way. There was nothing I was trying to suggest there but did you meet his family at all?
I think I met his family once because his father came to fetch us from the airport when we arrived but that's it. I didn't see them later on and Mohamed was living at his father's, at his family's place actually in Cairo and Volker Hauth and we had rented a flat in another part of Cairo so we just met during the day and the evenings for work but not …
So did you form any idea about their relationship or…
Within the family you mean? No I mean it appeared to be very unusual family structure… I mean he had left the family because he went to Germany so I think he wasn't that much any more like only the son of the family but he had become more independent by the time when he came back and lived with the family but I don't know any details about how this created problems or how the father's attitude was towards the son. I don't know.
In terms of his life what made him appear to you a conservative?
I mean he would follow all the duties that he had to follow as a believing Muslim concerning daily lives. He went to pray. He didn't drink alcohol and he wouldn't mess with women and I also realised that he was even criticising women … who were veiled for not wearing it properly because they wear it in a way that made them more beautiful instead of protecting them from male's eyes so he was, that was very conservative. This is where you could sense it especially in these sorts of criticisms he was saying about other people.
You were just saying those areas in which you felt that Mohamed was sort of obviously to you conservative and you were saying that sometimes it was about the way the women wore the Hijab. Was that when you were in Cairo?
We were in Cairo yes. I mean what would happen was, he would see women wearing a Hijab, and Volker Hauth and me for instance we would realise that it's looking good actually how they, how they do it. It's nice actually. It makes them beautiful. Then he was like saying yes, or he would criticise them because he was saying they would not wear the Hijab probably because they would choose certain colours which were too chic and they would like wear it or wind it in a way around their head that it would maybe make them even more attractive and so that was not the way it was supposed to be; or he would sometimes even say for himself. I mean not generally would he walk through the streets and point to people saying they wore the Hijab the wrong way but it was just close to the topic we were just talking about it was, he'd mention it or refer to it but …
So did he ever show any interest in women when you knew him?
I'm not informed about this thing anyway so I mean apparently there was a story that had been going on the year before, because sometimes Volker Hauth and then Mohamed were referring to it, talking about it but I have no idea, no details actually about it so.
This might be an inappropriate question but did you ever tease him about when he would say look, women shouldn't do that. Did you ever tease him and say, oh don't be such a conservative?
Well yeah, I mean naturally I would say like comments… exaggerate I mean they wear it as they want I mean as long as they are following the rules and he wouldn't agree…
Did you ever go to the engineer's syndicate?
Yeah. Sure because we had to meet some people there. I don't remember the names anymore.
Did you get a sense of the politics that were around?
Well I mean we talked about these politics naturally because the engineering syndicate was one of those that was increasingly being influenced by fundamentalist movements, I mean it was not only the engineer's one but several different ones as well were one of the political instruments the conservative or fundamentalists Muslims were using in order to increase their influence on state politics or on municipality because it was an organisation that was rather basic democratic, so people could bring people into places and pose where they wanted to be and it was not centrally controlled, but there was as far as I remember lots of critics about these processes going on by that time. There were people that were very critical about this change of politics within the syndicate because there were actually also many other people, engineers within the syndicates who did not like the syndicate to be instrumentalised for such a political direction.
And what did Mohamed think about it?
Oh no Mohamed was in favour of this idea. I mean in favour of this change.
The increasing Islamisation of the syndicate?
Yeah he was in favour of that because he was in favour of having a larger, a better lobby for Islamic social ideas and these things, so for him this was one of the necessary and important means to achieve this goal.
So do you think they were an important influence in terms of his developing ideas…The political ideas that were focused in the syndicate?
Well I'm not sure you know that he was linked up to the syndicate in a closer way because he had studied and then he left Egypt so generally you only get in contact with the syndicate after you have finished studies, and you start working and since he hadn't worked at least not for a long time there was probably no real possibility for the syndicate influencing his views. He might still have received or read something about them, because it was always in the newspapers because there was this discussion going on, on this process and so there were comments and interviews with people who were in favour of this and who were discussing the ideas actually that were behind it, so he knew what it was about and actually he was, he thinking about this and so there might have been influence, because he read about it and heard about it, but no direct personal influence of certain people within the syndicate I don't…
Do you remember going, do you remember any conversations or meeting any people who were from that Islamic group when you went? Do you remember what was talked about or anything about going to …
No there was, there was nothing from this. I mean and all the organisations or planning offices we went to h had no link to such an approach so I never observed that kind of conversation.
When you went back to Hamburg after the trip to Cairo did you keep in touch?
Well we kept in touch for a while because we still had to finalise our research results so I mean I stayed longer in Egypt, then I stayed for six months, even more so I came back only in early Spring '96 to Germany and we met up in Hamburg then for a weekend in order to discuss what we had already written and to coordinate what still had to be written and afterwards I only had for a certain while indirect contact because Volker Hauth was sometimes telling me about what Mohamed was doing but also Volker Hauth lost contact at that time to Mohamed. So I had contact with Mohamed after Spring of '96.
Did Volker Hauth tell you about how he was getting on or whether or not he seemed to be getting more …
No he remarked one time that he was now working for a company in Hamburg and that he was still studying and working … and these things you know. Volker Hauth didn't see him much either anymore so … even Volker Hauth couldn't tell me about him.
And do you think that was a sign of anything the fact that not even Volker Hauth was seeing him anymore or…
No I didn't take it as a sign no. I mean I don't know. I mean by then I naturally didn't take it for any sign when I mean it was just… I mean I couldn't be a good friend of his because we simply didn't find lots of common ground. So I mean I found him a nice person and when we met I mean I could deal with him and it was OK and I also enjoyed it but a as I was not living in Hamburg I mean I didn't think about continuing a long term friendship.
And not enough common ground anyway?
Yeah.
Because…
Well because we had such different ideas about aspects of religion and culture so … that was actually made it difficult but politically I mean we sometimes shared the same ideas so it was… and he being critical of certain political processes in Egypt and the Middle East and it was like we were disagreeing on some and then agreeing on some so it was …
Did he ever talk to you about what he wanted to be? What he wanted to go on and become?
Yeah naturally, I mean he wanted to work as an architect and city planner in Cairo and he was very serious about it and hoped actually to be able to improve the situation and to find a place in the system where he would be able to influence the situation. Which naturally is not easy if you look at the structures which are pretty much controlled by …nepotism and so …
Did he feel that? That it would be hard?
Yeah I mean we talked about this problem also during our stay in Cairo. I mean he was aware of it before, and he got even more aware of it when we were there again and so I think in a way he was still hopeful. He still wished and hoped that he might find such work in Cairo but he was sceptical about the possibility of really changing things in Egypt and finding good and sensible work.
Because of…
Well because if you are critical of certain persons or certain political circumstances, if you don't know this and that person you will never get this sort of job that's why.
It's an obvious question but I want to ask I mean what did you feel when you opened the newspaper and saw his name.
I certainly wouldn't believe it. I mean I saw his picture in the newspaper. This is actually how it started, yes so we had this newspaper on our table and I looked at it. It was early in the evening and I seen this photo of a person on the title page and I was stunned because I thought, I know this person so I looked at it closely, it really looked like Mohamed El-Amir so I looked under the photo what was written there and it said it was a person Mohamed Atta who was supposed to have been the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Centre but there was no more information about this, and I didn't believe that it was him. I just thought maybe they made a mistake and they got this photo from somewhere or they took him for another person who apparently was linked to it or so I was looking for different explanations for how come this person I knew and which I would never expected to do such a thing could now be linked to this attack.
What happened then was that an hour later I got a phone call from Volker Hauth in Hamburg who had found out my telephone number via my parents and because we hadn't been in contact anymore since 98; and the moment that he called me I already knew what it was about because I mean there could be only one reason why Volker Hauth would now call me, and then I tried to find out when he was telling me that he had already contacted the police because he knew the person but he was also convinced that it couldn't have been him actually. He wanted to be in contact with the police in order to deliver proof that Mohamed is not the sort of person who would do a suicide attack and such a murder, and well this is how it started and I mean it took me quite a while because I was still also very sceptical about the whole idea of you know only Arab names listed as suspects actually…it was too outspoken.
The reaction was too outspokenly anti-Arab from the beginning. I mean from everything you would observe from the outside, you would not have the inside information and know the signs were clear enough, but this was also the reaction which was going around here. Maybe funny to say that everybody, all of my friends here they all, even people in the street I mean they were, many of them were really shocked, they wouldn't believe what was going on. There was only very few people who were like saying, I mean they hit the Pentagon and…very scared of what would happened afterwards because nobody knew actually who did it and then when the question, the question was obvious who did it and they all said it couldn't have been Arabs, never; because they wouldn't have the financial means, they wouldn't have the skills and…People wouldn't just believe that this was done by Arabs. Everybody hoped it was not the Arabs …because it would just make the situation worse and they all hoped, there were all these ideas that it was the Japanese Red Army who did it as a revenge for Pearl Harbour attack and these so everybody was constructing different solutions. All that it has been Osama who was behind it because I mean who would profit from this at all, and so people [found it very difficult] to believe what had been going on there.
And for you?
For me it was similar in a way, although I mean everything is speculation. We simply do not know what happened though, and from what happened then and how quickly actually research was focused on a certain group of Arab passengers in the plane I also found, I had this sense that there was interest behind it actually to focus on these sort of people and there was at least from what you observed from the press you had the, you got the impression that everybody was hoping in the US that it was the Arabs or the Muslims; whereas I and many other people here that would say that maybe it was an inner American thing because we all thought of Oklahoma I mean you know one of the biggest bombing was in the US was done by a US citizen and he had nothing to do with Islam so that was one of the very probable solutions that anybody had for the question like who was it? And then it was just like following what was going on and I started having these phone calls from journalists from places all over the world but …
What do you think now though? I mean have you in a sense come to terms with the fact that maybe the Mohamed that you knew did fly this plane?
Well I think it's difficult to really come to terms with it because the Mohamed I knew would not have done it so he must have changed a lot afterwards and I have no idea because I had no contact with him, what happened to him and when exactly and …
Do you think about that? What must have happened?
Yeah, naturally I think about it but I can't know. I mean I can't figure it out although from how I knew him, you know the only thing that I believe would have made him do such a thing would have been political reasons and not religious, because from a religious stand he was a very humanist person but he got really upset and extreme in his judgments when it came to politics and so I think it must have been something political rather, and maybe I think Robert Fisk actually he wrote an article these days in which he linked up and he made a very good remark which was that after Mohamed apparently wrote this testament of his, his last will was apparently written in April '96, exactly the month of the massacre when the Israelis bombed the UN Refugee camp in Southern Lebanon and several hundred civilians had died and there was no big published negative response to it. I mean Israel was like … don't do this again but nothing more happened. You can understand somebody being upset about this you know there might be a link really because…
The timing is such that… you believe there could have been a link. No one can prove it but…
The timing is such.
But you believe there could have been a link.
We can't prove it now anymore, because I mean who would tell us.
What did you think when you read the will?
Well I didn't read the will completely, but I found it odd. I mean I didn't understand it really. I mean some of the things were the usual and others were really a little bit weird but I do not know the details.
It just seemed strange to write it so early…
That is what surprised me you see. I mean it was when he wrote it in Spring 96, because that was still the time when I knew him or at least when I just had got out of contact with him and by that time you know he didn't appear to me as such a person who might feel the urge to write his last Will and this sort of last Will …I would have thought the thing to take much more time, to have been taken place later, so I was really surprised when they said that the last Will was written in '96.
As far as you know, was he ever a member of any Islamic Group?
Oh I have no idea. I don't know. I can't say. I mean he never talked about being a member of a group and I didn't observe him meeting people or going to the same places, or there was no hint of this actually. I mean he had like this this naturally this ex pat group in Hamburg he was, he was praying with which is a very normal thing for Muslim ex pats living in other countries because they have to join to pray, so I mean … has to be has to be done in a group and not alone, so this is why it is necessary for them to form a group to do it actually.
Was there ever anything about the decadence that there is in a city like Hamburg that you felt Mohamed ever expressed to you, sort of offended by the decadence of the West as exhibited in Hamburg or anywhere?
No I don't remember that he referred directly to such a thing. I mean it was rather indirectly of how he would expect a proper Muslim women to behave that maybe you could sense the critic towards, towards western ways of dressing maybe, of behaviour which he even would have, like in Egypt against women who were not wearing Hijab or wearing or carrying clothes like jeans or t-shirts - this was actually what he was referring to. I mean I only spent one weekend in Hamburg when I met him so I think because his critics were often not very much context related so he would not tell us about his critics, about life in Hamburg when we were in anther place. There was nothing like that. He maybe did but just didn't mention it to me.
So you don't remember times when he would talk an American movie or an American style of food?
No, no no there was nothing like that actually. I mean it was, he was not that anti whatever western in that way I mean … it was rather a thing of live and let live approach maybe that was behind it.
One of the extraordinary things about all of them was that they were able to do this, plan this for a number of years… Do you think he had that capacity to be able to lead a separate life?
Yeah I mean on the one hand… I mean there are like two questions. I considered him able to organise and to plan such a thing. I mean not because it is a crime but because he was good at organising and he was also a person who could lead other people so he could be a leader type of guy and take decisions and be [good] in organising things. The second part of the question is, could he do this in a secret part of life, which apparently he did. I don't… so he was able to do it, which you couldn't know before exactly because he was able to do it so…
How does that make you feel about you, you knew him.
Yeah I mean I ask myself, naturally if he was already this sort of person who would have done this, when I knew him or not but as far as I knew him then, he was not the kind of person, so this is why I say there should have been this change going on with him but it was surprisingly early as you said, that he already wrote this last Will in early '96; so there I naturally question myself, if he was already thinking about this things or planning something already or meeting people early on, but then he managed to do this without anybody of us remarking and it leads me to the question like how far can you know a person at all? It's if you think you know him already and you can judge in general his his kind of personality but I never had the impression by that time that he had a certain path or second or secret life.
At the other end naturally I didn't grasp the whole of his life which is very normal because I was new to the Egyptian contacts then; I mean there were many things strange to me or things that I had to get to know or understand and to learn what they meant and so I'm probably the wrong person to ask if he had a sort of life which I would not know about or understand. I mean this question could only be answered by a person from his surroundings, from his Egyptian surroundings, which would know how people would act in a normal way. Or if he had something which was conspicuous or…
But it does make you ask yourself how well can you ever know somebody?
Yeah actually it's not that I'm really suffering from this question because I still think that Mohamed … that I had understood or known him quite well or to an extent so I think I mean it's probably that he changed later on.
do you feel that in some ways you can understand, or speculate about the unhappiness that must have led someone to the despairing view of the world that you'd have to do something like that?
Well I don't think it was in isolation, if he was that isolated. I think I mean he was naturally able to communicate with people on a more daily level because he was working in this company in Hamburg and it was not that he was completely isolating himself there. So he was also doing things on his own and he was going to pray and he would not enter into religious discussions with people because naturally he would feel completely alone because he would be the only person having this [sort] of idea about his religion, and generally it's difficult to discuss issues of especially Islam and Islamic religion in Germany for instance or any western country because there are so many prejudices and before you can start to make people really understand what it is about, you're running into so many prejudices and people just won't stop actually believing the prejudices more than what you say.
So it is a very very difficult situation and it gets even more difficult when you are a religious person and I think this is why he surely wouldn't really talk about religion, which was apparently an important part of his life. He had a very 'disconservative' stand which was growing apparently more extreme, actually was isolating this, and he might have looked for other people he could share something with, but still, this way of isolation will not give a reason at least which I can understand, [why he would take such an action]. That would rather facilitate the impossibilities of planning it, but it would not be the reason for it.
Basically it speaks of frustrated rage.
Yes it's frustrated rage and frustration coming from very different origins, for very different reasons actually and I mean this is the only explanation I have for this. And as I said I could sense this sort of frustration and rage especially in in his political critics about what was going on in the world especially in the bias politics against Muslims, as he would have regarded it. We had these discussions also I remember once, that we talked about the role of the UN in the Iraq conflict and in Czechoslovakia and he was very [ ] in his criticism against the UN that it was outspokenly anti Islamic… interesting actually that somebody would consider the UN politics outspoken and anti Islamic, I tried to make him understand that it might appear, the politics might appear anti Islamic because they are guided by other interests, by countries which are not Islamic and so they just follow their interests and that the way to see it as something outspokenly anti Islamic is just the effect of somebody who was victimised by it and who feels that this is directed against him but it's just directed against nobody in particular. It's just in favour of their own interests but not against somebody and so I tried to convince him that he was taking actually the Islamic aspect as too important in this political game because it was not anti Islamic politics but it was if at all a pro American or pro capitalist country politic.
Could he see that?
Then third world countries, which in this part of the world happen to be Muslim countries fall victim too and this is the thing. I mean but no he didn't really see that.
He couldn't, didn't want to, couldn't...
Well I mean he saw my point and he was thinking about it, but he still was believing that there was something in what he had said or that there was actually these anti Islamic motives behind certain politics of the UN and the US.
That the UN was specifically anti Islamic?
Yeah. Not in everything they did but they were doing things which apparently were anti Islamic.
Rather than just pro western you mean?
Yeah, but this brings me to another sort of what I observed in the last weeks because in everything you could read in the newspapers and many things that you would hear on the radio would always see people looking for the motivations of what Mohamed did in his religion and everybody was trying to pin it down on the fact that they were Muslims doing this and I think this is completely off the track because these people did not do this because they were Muslims. The way probably they argued it or they were defending their motivations they were using, they were doing it within the Muslin discourse because this is the context they are referring to but the motivations, the reasons for it are not the religion is nothing which forces them to do something like this. To the contrary you would find the majority saying you know, you are forbidden to do this because they were innocent people killed and this is something which his not allowed especially from the [Islamic] point of view so it is political actually, in that it's political action and political motivation behind it and this can not be used to the fact you know that Islam has something about it which makes somebody a killer in a certain point of time; but it is rather like that world political structure has something about it which makes some people become killers at a certain point of time out of frustration. I think this is much more the point we have to look for if you ask why is a person like Mohamed Atta did something like this.
Volker Hauth Interview
Hamburg, Thursday 18 October, 2001
source: Four Corners, Monday 12 November, 2001 ABC TV
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/atta/interviews/hauth.htm
Liz Jackson interviews Volker Hauth, who knew Atta well during the years he studied in Hamburg, and accompanied him on several trips to the Middle East.
…Now the government tried to convert this very lively road to a pedestrian zone and they tried to push out the local population. They were obliged to live in one of the new cities which are built in Egypt. Our opinion was that these plannings were not the right way to take care of the specific structure you may find in the inner city of Cairo but it was quite difficult to tell this opinion openly.
Mohamed told us it may cause problems for him if we showed our professional opinions to open cause he wanted to, after studying in Germany, he wanted to return to Egypt and he wanted to work in Egypt and in Arabia. He always was, that was my impression, after what he said, he was always in danger of being criminalised. He was member of the syndicate of the engineers and as he told me, I asked him about fundamentalism and Islamism and he told me about the Muslim Brotherhood that many members of the syndicate of advocates and of engineers are members of the Muslim Brotherhoods.
He was no member of the brotherhood but by this I got the impression that the members of the brotherhood do not stand aside of the society they are more part of the intelligency of the population and Egyptian President or the Egyptian government tried to give the impression that all members of the Muslim Brotherhood are criminals and are people of less education or of mean education and like Mohamed Atta how he called Mohamed Al-Amir told me the opposite was real, was true…
And when you say he was concerned that he would be criminalised, why was that?
He told me about the daily practice of the government to criminalize people of a said opinion. Egyptian and especially the Egyptian President, Mubarak tries to give the impression that Egyptian is a democracy, is a free democratic country in the western sense of democracy and freedom but Mohamed told me that it was not possible to give or to tell open oppositional opinion. Most governors or most presidents of Egypt have belonged to the army before and from my own experience in the army, I have the impression people coming from the army have a look of black and white. There is nothing between. You have friends or you have enemies and in Egypt you either may have the same opinion like the government or you are an enemy of the government. The real opposition like you have in the democracies of the western states or in the western world, you can't find in Egypt. There is no real opposition and…I did not get the impression that these are true elections in a democratic sense.
Was Mohamed a member of the engineer's syndicate?
Yes, he was a member of the engineer syndicate. In Germany I am a member of the engineer's syndicate also. It's necessary to be allowed to work as architect, you have to be a member of the syndicate, even also in Germany like in Egypt. But he told me he was no member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
But he told you that he thought that there were particular problems for the Muslim Brotherhood in the syndicate or that they were an important part of the syndicate…
No. Members of the syndicate, or many members of the syndicates were members of the brotherhoods and most seemed from the opposite, most members Muslim Brotherhood were members of the syndicate of lawyers or advocates and engineers.
Did he talk to you about the crackdown that there was on the Islamists and particularly on the Muslim brotherhoods in those syndicates?
The manner, the Egyptian government used the expression fundamentalist, Mohamed told me was very superficial and schematic attempt to criminalise all people with opposite opinions.
Did he say that particularly within the Engineer's Syndicate, within the profession that he wanted to work?
No, no. This attempt to criminalize people was not concentrated on one of the syndicates, he told me it was a general problem of the Egyptian government to push away all people with opposite opinions and Mohamed was a very well educated person and he was a religious person and both people with religious orientation and people with a very high education all around the world may have opposite opinions than the government of the country they live in and by this he was in danger of being criminalised. Only by having a different opinion. This was my impression of what Mohamed told me.
And when you say a religious person, what do you mean?
I did not have the impression of being fanatic but it was a very strict religious orientation. He had his prayer five times a day and he practiced Ramadan. I don't know if he had taken part at the Haj, if he travelled to Mecca, he didn't tell me. But I didn't get the impression of being fanatic. He was very strict but not fanatic. You may know Muslims do not have any sense of humour concerning religion in the Christian religion, there is a special sense of humour concerning religion if you know Monte Python or attempts like this to have a new view on religion, in the Islamic religion, this is not possible.
Do you think he did have a sense of humour generally?
He had a sense of humour, yes we joked about governments, the Syrian government and we travelled together to Syria a year before and we joked about this. It was possible to laugh about, especially about politics.
Can you remember the first time that you met Mohamed?
Yes we met in a seminar about planning and building in development countries at the University and Mohamed was very interesting person for me cause I've been in Egypt and Palestine two times before and this was a good opportunity to get more informations and to get better impressions of this country I have travelled before. We began to work together at the end of 1994 and we prepared a journey to Syria to Aleppo where we studied life and structure of the old city of Aleppo. A very characteristic old city. It's comparable only with the old city of Cairo and these were the main interest of Mohamed, the traditional structure and the daily life, the mixture of traditional structure and actual daily life in these old Islamic inner cities of Aleppo and of Cairo because he was interested in the specific structure of these old cities. In former times, there was no separation of political and religious life in Arabia. In the western world, we have the separation of the political life on the one side and the religion on the other side and in former times, also in Europe, but in former times in Arabia, this was some kind of unity, Mohamed told me and these old cities and these Islamic old cities you get a very lively impression how the daily life may have been from the time. This was the main interest of Mohamed. He studied the German language with very much discipline and he spoke very fine or his knowledge of German language was excellent. I do not remember any specific hobbies but I think to have hobbies is a special quality of western life and it's a special quality of rich and handsome western life. In Arabian countries young people meet but do not have time and they do not have money for practicing hobbies like you have in the western world. The daily life is much more working or meeting friends and sitting together. It's not playing tennis or playing golf. That's part of the life of the so-called fat cats in the Egyptian population or young population you have different groups and the group with the highest income, are the so-called fat cats, these are families with narrow relations to the government. It's astonishing that people or persons belonging to the government in Egypt are also leaders or managers of national companies.
What did Mohamed feel about what you're calling the fat cats?
He told me about different groups of the population of Egypt beginning with the Infitah, Infitah means the opening of the Egyptian politics, to the western world. President Sadat began with this policy to open the economy to the western world and in this time a few families, especially families or clans increased their income and these families with the close contacts to the government of the so-called fat cats income of these families is absolutely incomparable to the income of, for example, of academics. If you know that in that a teacher of a high school earns about 350 German marks a month that are about 175 US dollars and other persons in Egypt may afford new Mercedes cars, there's a gap between the academic world and the world of the persons working in the industry or leading managing companies… the income of the poor people is incomparable maybe 50 dollar dollars a month or 100 dollars a month.
What did Mohamed feel or say to you about that gap between the rich and the poor?
He was not happy about the injust or unfair way of living and of distribution of a wellness and income. His idea was to have income for anybody to have the opportunity to survive with health and good education but many are a big part of the Egyptian population can't take part in the daily life of the better off and many people do not have the opportunity to give a good o education to their children. Many children have to work because they do not earn enough money and the interest of Mohamed and his professional work was to increase the circumstances of the poor people. This was my impression…. His first study was architecture and for architects all around the world, it's possible to make much money if you work for the better off but architecture is not only a technical science, it's also a social science and for this Mohamed continued his first study with studying urbanism and town planning because of his interest of social life.
Living here in Hamburg, he obviously experienced a western style of living, saw it directly. Did he ever talk to you about how he felt about a more western style of living, what he thought about that?
I do not remember exactly what he told me. He didn't take part in many affairs of the western world. He made some sports but most of the time he studied and he was in contact with Arabian friends. It was a strange world for him, a strange language. Strange daily life for a religious orientated person. Most of Germans are not used to pray and daily… I don't think he had many relationships to the German or to the western world. He studied the western world and he studied the policy, the democratic practices.
Do you think anything that the western world had to offer or has to offer appealed to him?
Yes I get the impression that he was interested in the German way. I don't know about his opinions of the American life, but that he was interested in the German way, the German attempt to spread or to distribute prosperity or to reach prosperity for all members of the community. For all parts of the population. That's an old principle… of the Muslim world that anybody may take part in the daily life that anybody has enough to survive that anybody has the opportunity to get educated. It's an idea of the Muslim or of the Islamic world.
I guess I also meant, did anything of the more hedonistic things that the western world has to offer appeal to him?
He was not interested in this I think. He was not interested in cars or in, no I don't remember this…
I mean movies, nightclubs
No, nothing at all.
Girls? Any of the things that the west, the freedoms that, a personal lifestyle that the west offers attractive.
I think freedom and the possibility to tell your opinion openly was of great interest for him or it was of big interest for him but all these good of the western world like you told me cars, girls, motor cycles, or things like that, he was not interested in.
Television, movies?
I don't know if he had a TV set. No I don't think so and I don't remember him going to the movie.
Ever?
Can't remember.
Music?
We spoke about music cause I'm interested in music and I like playing music and he told me for Muslims it is not allowed to listen to music or to enjoy music in the way people from the western world enjoy music because of the impact of music. If you have a look to the young people dancing, very loud music, the impact is comparable to the impact of drugs and this is not allowed to Muslims.
And what did he think that that music might make them do or feel?
It may have the impact of a sedative or the opposite impact of … stimulants and the stimulation of Muslim or other the root and the base of the stimulation of the Muslim is the belief.
It sounds such a strict way to live.
Yes. He lived in a much more strict way than person from the western world, that's right. But that doesn't mean that he couldn't enjoy anything. He enjoyed sweets or he enjoyed laughing, walking around meeting friends, meeting, being in company with friends. That's one of the joys of Arabian people. Arabs do not like to be alone like western people.
Did you meet many of his friends here?
We met some of his friends on the street and he told me this is so and so and we shook hands and changed some words but I do not remember or any of his friends. Also in Egypt we met some friends on the street but we did not get in close contact with his friends.
Did you feel close to him?
Yes.
What do you think was the bond, what was it that made you feel close to him?
My religious orientation is not as strict as his orientation, his religious orientation was but I think the interest in religious ideas, my interest in religious ideas was some kind of bridge to his religious opinions and to his religious practice. People with strict religious practices and religious orientation, a traditional religious orientation is quite difficult to get in contact with people who do not have an idea of religion and many of the other students did not have an idea of religion.
And that was a bond between you?
Yes. I think so.
How long did you know him for?
We met in 1993 and the last time I met him was about 1996 or 1997.
Can you remember the last time that you saw him?
We met in the street or in the bus, some kind like that and spoke only shortly. We hadn't seen for some month and I didn't get the impression of a change or something like that.
But what happened, how come you didn't see him again?
My study finished and in Germany when a student's work, they study and they work and the same time and in the later semesters if you're near to the diploma you do not go to the University daily….Some of the students go to the university only once a week or two weeks and then I change my flight, first I lived in Hamburg and then I changed to the northern part of Hamburg and by this we didn't meet like we met before.
Were you surprised that you had no contact at all? I am curious because you were close and he was still here till the year 2000… you seemed to have some sort of bond and good strong discussions about religion and politics so that's why I ask, it just seemed like, to suddenly end … perhaps you might have been a big loss for him in terms of someone that he could relate to.
Maybe. It was not a sudden loss….We worked together until 1996 but we worked not very closely. We had to write a report about the time in Cairo but we did not meet as often as before because we both had to work and by this our ways went aside…
Was there a period of time in which over a period of time, did you think that he changed in the kind of person he was from when you first met him?
When I first met him about 1993, he did not wear a beard, and in about 1995, end of 1994, suddenly he had a beard and I also have a beard and by this I asked him what about your beard and he told me all people wearing a beard in Egypt are thought to be fundamentalists and due to this in solidarity with all people criminalised in Egypt now. He wanted to wear a beard also. He didn't want to hide his personal opinions, religious people have a beard in Egypt and if you do not want to be criminalised or if you don't want to have problems, you can't your beard but Mohamed told me … he wanted to show his opinions freely, openly and he didn't want to hide his opinions. That was one of the qualities I liked and I didn't get the impression of Mohamed being a sleeper, a so-called sleeper. In the years I met and I knew him he was not, or he didn't act like a sleeper. He showed his opinions openly, we spoke about politics, we spoke about the western world. He showed his scepticism about the western world, we spoke about Israel and the Israel politics and also here he showed openly his scepticism and his critique and I did not get the impression of Mohamed trying to hide anything.
When you say his scepticism about the western world, what do you mean by that?
There was one example I don't remember the year exactly but once a western nation, I'm not sure if this was America or European nation, sent a ship with rubbish to Egypt and Mohamed told me he didn't like this. That the rich western nations exported their rubbish to the poor Arabian nations. This was one example of critique and I think the critique was just and fair. We spoke about the politics of Israel and the USA or the symbiotic relationship of Israel and the USA and he was very unhappy not to be allowed to visit Jerusalem. For a Muslim Jerusalem is one of the holy places and as Egypt he was not allowed to visit this holy place and he was quite unhappy about this cause I told him I have been there twice.
Did he feel strongly about the Palestinian issue?
I asked him about the problem, it was not him talking about it and he was not happy about the politics of Arafat he did not like the attempt to find a way or the attempts Arafat made cause he had the impression that Arafat gave away too much.
He thought Arafat compromised too much?
Yes. That was his impression, that's also my impression.
So he was in a sense more hardline than Arafat?
I won't call him a hardliner
I thought I might have used the wrong word. Do you think he was a person who liked a compromise?
Yes, that was one of his main qualities to find compromise, to communicate. I have got one image if the right door is closed, he tried to use the left door. There's no way on the right side, you have to take the left side to reach the target and I travelled with him in Syria and in Egypt and I got the impression that his capability of communicate with different people was extremely good.
At some point when he was in Hamburg, something must have happened, do you take that view and if so is there anything now that points to you about when that was?
Being asked of any or for any explanations of what happened in New York, and the first moment I thought of the visit of Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. By this he threatened a holy place of the Islamic world and threatening or damaging a holy place is a sacrilege and it may have been answered by threatening and damaging the holy place of the western world and from the view of an Arab, from the view of a Muslim, the World Trade Centre in New York is a holy place for the western world and this may be or this may show an interrelationship and this visit of Ariel Sharon giving fire to the oil or burning the oil may have been the last drop, the water overflowing.
Did Mohamed ever talk to you about what he really wanted to do, like what were his dreams?
Yes he told me he wanted to work for an international organisation of corporation and development because in being member of an international organisation, he wouldn't have been in danger of being imprisoned, he wanted to work in Egypt, he wanted to work in Arabia as a planner, as an urbanist, but he wanted to be saved of being criminalised. And this was his dream to work in Egypt.
He had a real fear that he would be put in prison for his religious strengths?
No it was not the fear of being imprisoned but it was a fear not be allowed to say what he meant and for well educated person, it's some kind of torture not to be allowed to tell what your confessions are. You know about the so-called inner exodus, many persons living in a country with a very restrictive political systems, live in the so-called inner exodus, they don't tell what they think but they can't make him happy any day than Mohamed wanted to live in Egypt, he wanted to live in Arabia and he wanted to become happy. And not being allowed telling or showing the inner opinions, not having the opportunity to show the professional knowledge he had would be some kind of torture.
Did he think that he would ever be able to realise and do what he wanted to do, did he ever talk about his fear of not being able to realise and do what he wanted to do?
No he didn't tell this.
Being frustrated?
I got the impression of depression that I think that's a special quality of many academics or of the intelligentsia of Egypt.
When you say depression, what, what was it about to him that made you say that?
The problem of the academic world in Egypt and the problem of Mohamed was that in Egypt it causes problems to show your confessions, to show your knowledge, your professional knowledge openly. In Egypt I get the impression that many academic people or people of academic education are very depressed and in Egypt you have an exodus of academics. Many academics of Egypt would like to leave the country to work in other countries to have a job and to work concerning to their beliefs and to their knowledge and not always thinking of what hasn't the government told us and what have I tell now not to get in conflict with the government or the police.
So it was a general thing rather than a feeling that he was, was there anything about his manner that made you feel he was depressed, frustrated, angry?
I don't think it was special quality of or a symptom of Mohamed, it was a general problem of Egypt that people were not like that it causes problems to show knowledge and confessions of ….
Did you meet his family when you were there?
We met the father at the airport. He took us to the flat where my German colleague and I lived and we met two aunts in Kafir el-Sheikh where Mohamed comes from but I didn't meet the mother and the sister.
Some people have said to us that it was a very high achieving family and that his father had big expectations of Mohamed. Did you ever have that impression, did he ever talk to you about having in some sense to live up to his father's expectations?
No, we didn't talk about this. His father had different profession and professional prospective of advocates and architects or planners are incomparable.
I want to ask you about something, I'm sure you've been asked about it many times, in terms of any interest that he had in women, I understand there was one time when you were with him in Aleppo, can you tell us about that time?
No, I don't want to repeat this.
Because you don't think it's true or…?
No. It's of few words, it was lean mean, mean value. He wanted to have a family, I get the impression and he did not have a girlfriend, but he told me, I asked him about a girlfriend and he told me in Egypt his family and the family of a young lady, thought of starting a relation…but and I told him about a relationship, about being married and he told me it was not yet time to get married….His interest was to study and to finish his studies first and then to have a family. I get the impression he wanted to have a family.
And in the meantime he thought that having girlfriends was not appropriate?
No in Arabia the life of young people is totally different from the life of young persons or young people in the western world, it's not that the way like young men and young ladies or young women, the western world may meet in a café or stayed together for a night or so in Egypt it's more strict. You are not allowed to meet a girl you're not married with and the religious orientated families and by this Mohamed had no idea of having a girlfriend.
There was no idea of getting in contact with a young girl or a young lady in the western sense.
When it became more and more apparent that it was in fact Mohamed who had flown the plane into the World Trade Centre, what did you think must have happened to the Mohamed that you knew?
For a long time I couldn't imagine that Mohamed had taken part in this terroristic act and also now I didn't find a reason, an exact reason, you can't find any exact reason for what happened but there are no clear hints which may lead to this what happened. His personal bitterness and depression are no sufficient hints for this act. There are no hints or you may try to have an explanation but I couldn't find a sufficient explanation for what happened and for Mohamed taking part in this act even.
Did he ever talk to you about America?
Maybe, I couldn't remember a specific situation talking about Americans, he didn't show any fanaticism against America, his critique and his scepticism was orientated against the separation of the Egyptian population which means that the western style of living gets in contact or confrontates with the traditional way of living but that's an inner Egyptian problem or he gave the impression that he was interested in the Egyptian life, the daily life and the threatening of the traditional life by western ideas.
So you felt that in some sense the west was invading culturally invading or taking over the Islamic way of life?
Yes. That's daily life in Egypt.
Did he speak to you about that?
We spoke about that, yes. The industrial nations do not only export cars or tanks or things like that, they do not only export rubbish, they also export their way of living. It's quite opposite to the traditional way of living in an Islamic country or is in an Arab country.
And do you think Mohamed resented that?
Mohamed was not very happy of this cause the western kind of living and the traditional way of living, there is no co-existence, it's a confrontation in Egypt. If you tried to live in the traditional way you get problems. You get many points and you will be confrontated. If you built houses in the traditional way, you touch the interests of the industry who tries to sell the western products of modern building and you will find many examples of confrontation of the traditional way of living on the way side and the western way of living on the other side. And these are not only problems of religion, these are also problems of technique and problems of money. If you try to find solutions, therefore daily life, if you try to find cheap techniques for daily life of the bigger part of the population, you threaten the interest of companies, of western companies to sell expensive techniques, for example air condition or things like that.
And did he talk to you about things like that?
Yes we spoke about this because planning towns, planning houses means to discriminate between modern technique and old technique. You have to think about costs and the modern technique is much more expensive and many are a big part of the Egyptian population can't afford the western techniques and by this big part of the Egyptian population can't take part at the daily life.
What do you think when people just say anybody who did that must just be mad, must be a psychopath?
I think that's right. You can't find intellectual explanation for what happened. You can find an explanation for depression and you can find an explanation for bitterness and sadness but you can't find an intellectual explanation for this terroristic act, something in the mind must have changed totally that any intellectual thought has been switched off. That's my opinion.
So that must be what happened.
I think so. It's a psychological problem or individual psychological problem led to a very narrow view of the world. May have led to a very narrow view of the world which has come closer or which may have been focussed on an attempt to solve problems by such terroristic acts.
He never talked to you about people resorting to violence, he never discussed with you terrorism?
No, Mohamed was a very peaceful person searching for justice and I didn't ever get the impression that violence was a manner of or was a medium of reaching targets.
But he never referred to other acts, mean of say Palestinians suicide?
No, and by this I couldn't imagine that he took part this terroristic act.
source: TIME news by John Cloud Sunday, Sept. 30, 2001
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,176917-1,00.html
Before we get to his dislikes and disorders, his vexations as a child and his entanglements as an adult, let's poke inside Mohamed Atta's brain the night before he helped slaughter 7,000 people. "You have to remind yourself to listen and obey that night, for you will face situations that will require your obedience 100 percent," reads a letter found in Atta's luggage and in the belongings of two other hijackers. Atta would be happy to know that his evil was steadfast.
Though investigators are still excavating the hidden trails that led to Sept. 11, many point to Atta as the linchpin of the 19-man hijacking gang. From Hamburg, Germany, to South Florida to Las Vegas, Atta crossed paths with at least seven other hijackers. While some of these terrorists were barely out of their teens, Atta turned 33 days before the attacks. He seems to have been the center of gravity, the dour and meticulous ringleader. This is the story of how his malevolence was unleashed.
In Egypt, where Atta grew up, his family and friends describe a shy, unassuming young man who struggled to make his mark. They say he must have undergone a stark personality change to become the terrorist who supervised Sept. 11. Born in Kafr El Sheikh, a city on the Nile delta, Mohamed was the son of a lawyer and a homemaker. As a kid, his father says, he liked to play chess and disliked violent games. He was a scrawny youth--only 5 ft. 7 in. and until recently quite thin. (His dad called him "Bolbol," Arabic slang for a little singing bird.) Atta seemed overshadowed by his two sisters, who rose to become a zoology professor and a medical doctor. Atta graduated from Cairo University with a degree in architectural engineering and was an average student, according to his peers.
Atta made a few friends in school, but he was such a loner that when a classmate, Iman Ismail, drew a caricature of their class, she depicted Mohamed standing next to a sign posted on Egyptian military fences: COMING NEAR OR TAKING PHOTOS PROHIBITED. When it came to politics and religion, topics no Egyptian can avoid, he offered mainstream opinions. His friends don't remember ever seeing him pray, and they recall his harsh words for Islamic terrorists--"brainless, irresponsible people."
Which is why several of his Egyptian classmates could not accept his guilt in interviews with TIME. "I could never imagine him on a plane threatening people, killing people," says Ahmed Khalifa, 33, Atta's best friend at Cairo University. "He would be scared to death... He was not a leader. He had his opinion, but he was modest in everything. His emotions were steady, and he was not easily influenced or swayed. Mohamed was well liked because he never offended or bothered anyone." Says Ismail: "He was good to the roots."
But he had what could be interpreted as some ominous undercurrents. Atta could get exercised by the world's shortcomings, big and small. He spoke out impulsively against injustice. He was so sensitive that he could become emotional if an insect was killed. "He was a little bit pure," says Khaled Kattan, another classmate. "If he thought that I said or did something wrong, then he would say that in front of anybody."
Atta's father could be quite strict, according to friends. In interviews since Sept. 11, Mohammed El Amir, has denied that his son was involved in the attacks. "He is a moderate in his adherence to his faith like me and his mother," El Amir has said. But El Amir's politics suggest that Atta learned a few things about the world from his father. In a press conference last week, El Amir heatedly blamed the Israelis for the attacks and called the U.S. "the root of terrorism."
Cairo is one of the world's most crowded, impoverished cities, and by the early '90s, Atta felt the intense pressures on middle-class Egyptians not to slip in social rank. His friend Khalifa says Atta grew frustrated because he was unable to fulfill his academic ambitions in his homeland. He believed that political favoritism at Egyptian universities would keep him from the top spots.
So in autumn 1992, Atta enrolled at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, in a sleepy corner of northern Germany. He hoped to earn a degree in urban planning and then return to Egypt. In 1993, he befriended fellow student Volker Hauth, and the two often traveled and studied together in the next few years. Hauth liked Atta but sensed a rigidity in his friend. "I knew Mohamed as a guy searching for justice," Hauth told the Los Angeles Times. "He felt offended by this broad wrong direction the world was taking."
In the mid-'90s, Atta began disappearing from school for extended periods. He would tell his thesis adviser that he was going to Aleppo, Syria, to work on his thesis. (It explored the conflict between Islam and modernity as reflected in the city's planning, and it won high marks when completed in August 1999.) Atta was away from his job at a Hamburg consultancy for months in 1995; he reportedly said he had gone on a pilgrimage to Mecca. Co-workers recall him condemning terrorist attacks on tourists in Egypt. But he also bemoaned Western influence--specifically, the rise of skyscrapers--in Arab cities.
From mid-1997 to October 1998, Atta seems to have disappeared from Hamburg entirely. He told his thesis adviser that he was gone for family reasons, but it's clear that he underwent profound changes during this time. He returned to school with the bushy beard favored by fundamentalists. He was more serious. Hauth, who left the university at the end of 1995 and lost contact with Atta, told the London Observer his friend could laugh at jokes about Arab dictators. But Chrilla Wendt, who knew Atta after he returned, said she couldn't remember him smiling.
Atta had grown more sullen about his life prospects. His old friend Khalifa ran into him on a Cairo street one day in 1999. He found Atta depressed about not having a career or a family back home. Atta said he had made few German friends. "I think he felt that he had just been studying all those years," Khalifa recalls. "When I said goodbye, I was sad."
German authorities now believe that sometime that year, Atta began touching base with a wide range of people connected to terrorism. They point to his association with a Syrian businessman, Mamoun Darkazanli, who had power of attorney for a German bank account in the name of a man thought to be Osama bin Laden's finance chief. Darkazanli denied any ties to terrorists last week.
Whatever Atta was doing behind the scenes, he was publicly spreading the word of the Koran. Early in 1999, university officials gave him permission to found an Islamic student group. (Investigators believe he eventually met hijackers Marwan Al-Shehhi and Ziad Samir Jarrah in the group.) The 40 or so members gathered to pray every day. The moderate boy from the outskirts of Cairo had grown devout, and he was surrounding himself with like-minded compatriots.
At the end of 1999, Atta, Al-Shehhi and Jarrah reported their passports stolen, possibly to clear any record of travel to Afghanistan. Within weeks, Atta and Al-Shehhi flew to the U.S. for a visit. Even at this early date, Atta may have been planning an air attack. Sometime in spring 2000, Atta--now a clean-shaven cartoon version of an American in Tommy Hilfiger and heavy cologne--walked into a U.S. Department of Agriculture office in Homestead, Fla., and inquired about loans for buying crop dusters. The office doesn't offer such loans, and it turned him away.
Atta returned briefly to Europe, but on June 3, 2000, he arrived in Newark, N.J., from Prague with a six-month tourist visa. Within a month, Atta and Al-Shehhi signed up for flight training at Huffman Aviation International in Venice, Fla. When the two men moved into a little pink house in nearby Nokomis, they brought sweets to their rental agent. Their Venice landlady, Dru Voss, says that while Al-Shehhi was a likable guy, Atta was an icicle who never looked her in the eye.
Atta and Al-Shehhi were eager students. Together they paid Huffman some $40,000 for about four months of training. Huffman owner Rudi Dekkers took an immediate dislike to Atta, the smaller man. Dekkers recalls that Atta once told him he had lived in Germany. Dekkers then launched into German, but Atta just turned away. Neither Atta nor Al-Shehhi socialized with the other 15 to 20 students.
Atta's tourist visa expired on Dec. 3, 2000, but no one seemed to notice (one of several lapses in immigration procedures that aided the hijackers). On Dec. 21, Atta and Al-Shehhi got their pilot licenses. About a week later, they trained for three hours each on the Boeing 727 simulator at Simcenter Inc. at Opa-Locka Airport, outside Miami. By that time, the two men, who called themselves cousins, had each logged about 300 hours of flying time. They were still beginners, but they knew enough to maneuver an airborne plane.
Around this time Atta and other hijackers purchased global-positioning devices known as GPS-3s from Tropic-Aero, an aviation-supply shop in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. These $475 devices, about the size of Game Boys, are used by pilots to navigate. Says Jerry Carbone, Tropic-Aero's president: "It's so simple to use, you and your wife would be able to find your way in a 767 once it's up. It's sad if [the hijackers] were able to use something anyone can get at K Mart."
In January of this year, Atta hopped a flight from Miami to Madrid. It's unclear why he went, and when he returned to Miami International Airport on Jan. 10, he was allowed back in the country despite his expired visa. He didn't bother to list his flight or carrier, yet sailed through immigration. The next month, Atta and Al-Shehhi rented a single-engine Piper Warrior from a Gwinnett County, Ga., flight school. Like many other pilots, they were honing their skills. Atta inquired again about crop dusters--this time in Belle Glade, Fla. He and some men with him wanted to know how much fuel and chemicals the yellow 502 Air Tractors could carry and whether special skills were needed to pilot them.
On April 26, Broward County sheriff's deputy Josh Strambaugh stopped Atta for a traffic violation. Atta didn't have his license with him and was given a citation. He did not show up for his hearing, and on June 4 a warrant was issued for his arrest. But it was too late. By this time, Atta and his men were moving every couple of months, drifting from one low-rent dwelling to the next. Nearing the final stages of their plotting, they had become very careful. They kept to themselves and seem not to have even attended a mosque. Only occasionally would somebody notice them. One observer was Jim Woolard, owner of a World Gym in Delray Beach, Fla., who recalls Atta as "driven" on the weight machines (perhaps one reason that the folks back home would have trouble recognizing the newly beefy Atta in photos released after Sept. 11).
On June 29, Atta traveled to Las Vegas, where he stayed in a cheap room, with the DO NOT DISTURB SIGN constantly dangling from the door. While in town, investigators told the Associated Press, he met with two other hijackers, Salem Alhazmi and Hani Hanjour. His Hamburg pals Al-Shehhi and Jarrah were also there, which suggests a planning session. Four of the five men were on separate flights on Sept. 11, and one theory is that the four leaders of the four hijacked planes were there to work out final details.
On July 9, Atta made another trip to Madrid. He spent 10 days in Spain, running up 1,250 miles on his rental car. His time there remains murky, but last week six men suspected of belonging to a group financed by bin Laden were arrested in Spain on charges unrelated to Sept. 11. Investigators are tracing Atta's steps to see whether he met with them.
Atta returned to the U.S. on a business visa. He made another quick trip to Las Vegas but spent most of his time in Florida. Sources have told TIME that in the 10 days before Sept. 11, Atta received at least two wire transfers of money from a man investigators have linked with bin Laden. But the last days weren't all business. On Sept. 7, Atta, Al-Shehhi and another man visited Shuckum's Oyster Bar and Grill in Hollywood, Fla. Contrary to earlier reports of his carousing, Atta was the only one of the three who didn't drink alcohol. Instead, he downed cranberry juice all night, sugary fuel for the pinball machine--Golden Tee '97--that he played for 3 1/2 hours.
When Atta brought hell to the north tower of the World Trade Center, when he perished in the flames and had his picture beamed around the world, friends back in Egypt were dumbfounded. They looked and looked again at the photos, trying to find the kid they once knew. "To fly a plane, what a joke! Mohamed could hardly ride a bike," says classmate Osama Abul Enein. "He came from an average middle-class background. Mohamed no way could have done that," agrees Ibrahim Salah, 33, a Cairo engineer who knew him in college.
But he did. How does someone change so much? Experts point out that extremist groups in the Muslim world have been attracting an increasing number of recruits who grew up comfortably. "Just because you are educated and travel does not mean that you cannot join a militant organization," says Hala Mostafa, an authority on militant groups at al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. "Terrorists should be illiterate or primitive? Not so."
Which still doesn't explain what happened to Mohamed Atta. "Let each find his blade for the prey to be slaughtered," reads a passage of the letter found in Atta's luggage. How Atta found his blade may never be known.
Ralph Bodenstein Interview
Beirut, Monday 15 October, 2001
source: Four Corners, Monday 12 November, 2001 ABC TV
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/atta/interviews/bodenstein.htm
Liz Jackson interviews Ralph Bodenstein who studied urban planning with Mohamed Atta at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harbug. He met him in 1994, when they, along with Volker Hauth, began working on a project in Cairo that was sponsored by the German government.
When did you first meet Mohamed?
Well I met him first at the end of 1994, he was studying in Hamburg…together with a colleague of his, Volker Hauth and they had prepared a project which was research to be done on plannings to be implemented or planned at least in the historic core of Cairo on the effects of traffic plannings and urban plannings on the social and urban situation and they had presented this project as a project for…a sort of non-governmental organisation but a big one who are very much interested in the exchange of scientists and of scholars that should be on the one hand between the US and Germany, on the other hand between Germany and third world countries and the program we were in was actually this program for the Third World countries which was sort of development politics program therefore, trainee program actually for young people from Germany to go into Third Eorld countries and to work with MDOs there and stuff like that so Volker Hauth and Mohamed El-Amir as he was called by then had developed this idea to make this project where they were looking for a third person to actually to come with them and I joined them in because I was doing Middle Eastern studies, urbanism and history of Islamic art.
I was studying it in Bonn actually so I joined them…and we did the preparation course together. This was actually the end of ’94 and went on until summer '95 and in August '95 we all left together for a three month field research period in Cairo.
So you worked together for about nine months?
I mean we went, you see these preparation courses they were just like a prolonged weekend every two months…like it was the first in December and then there was another one in February, another one in May something like that so it was only three courses. This is where we met for some days and we really were together then actually in Cairo for the first three months.
Tell us about the work in Cairo.
On the one hand we had to do field research on the ground in the … old town of Cairo, actually a specific area, all the area north of University, this is where we were working on, which are the northern city gates of historic Cairo and we were doing field research there actually on the economy on the ground. So actually what sort of craft and industry was there, of the traffic that was actually necessarily to supply them and to to get away the stuff they could use on the traffic actually of planes that were coming and going because it is not only a tourist site. Actually it's only the smallest part of Cairo which is really has been discovered by the tourist. The other part is just too far off or it's too popular actually for tourists to go there and we were mostly in these areas and … visiting factories and on the other hand we visited several planning offices as well from the municipality and the other state as well as private planning companies who were working for different projects of the state or of the municipality, and we looked at what they were actually planning in order to resolve problems; what problems did they actually see and how did they face them and deal with them. We tried to analyse actually the effects of these planning systems that were implemented on the existing social and economic structures and material structure of the story core.
What did Mohamed think about the kinds of plans that that the Egyptian Government or the tourist office had in mind for that particular area?
You see it's a little bit ambivalent to give a general judgment on that, because on the one hand there was this problem actually, of that there were many plans which just dealt with the issues in the interest of enforcing tourism in Cairo because one of the main state incomes actually for Egypt is the money which comes in from tourists, and so they pretty much concentrate on fostering tourism in Cairo as well which until then was not such a favourite place for tourists to stay so all these plans were pretty much concentrating on how to improve the situation for tourists and they did this by means of slowing the factories and the small scale industry which was there in the inner city and also by changing the physical environment like tearing down houses and trying to reconstruct historical structures that had been there before, now on the other hand you have the problem that these industries were also not in favour of the historical structures because if you've got aluminium factories in the city they only came there twenty years before. Before that they hadn't been there so they actually they just went in because it was a cheap place to set up a factory and it was central so you could easily deliver your clients to different parts of Cairo which made it actually a very important economic area which was cheap concerning rents and places but it was very effective in terms of space, and this was not in favour of historical monuments in the area. But on the other hand, many of the population, most of the people living there they were depending on these economic structures: they were working there and living there and it was very close for them so they had no transport costs… essential was the very low wages people are paid in Egypt so they were really depending on the fact that they did not have to come and go from a suburb to and from Cairo and paying buses and micro buses fees but they could just go walking or take a bicycle. So that was actually the general dilemma which every planning was facing there but what happened was that most of the plans that we dealt with and that we found were completely neglecting the social problem by just sending the people away and that's it. I mean they did not try and find other solutions for them. It was like clearing the space off of this industry, of the people and make it nicer for the tourists and so naturally I mean it wasn't only Mohamed but also Volker Hauth and me were very negative about this way of dealing with with the people living in the city …
What did he say to you about it?
We were discussing all this issues and he was naturally saying that he was aware of the fact, that actually these industries were not good for the historical city core but on the other hand [look at the] social programs if you were really to take people to other places, you should also create work for them in these places which certainly did not work, they did not do this and so he would have preferred to only bring out the most dangerous or the most problematic industries which had the highest pollution rates and to keep the other small industries which just had high noise emissions which were not so problematic actually and that was rather the more moderate approach that he would have voted for, but it was not in the plans. But they also wanted to break through … into the city core so they would ease the traffic flow and with this, this would have also brought down lots of historical structures. Mostly what we talk about is buildings from the 18th and 19th century which were still standing there and which when actually compared to a… mosque from the 14th century is not considered to be a valuable structure, and so then it's just brought down and that was also very problematic because we found that this would only increase the traffic flow in certain areas but it will not stop people from going there so it would just relocate the problem but not really solve it.
So when you talked amongst yourselves what was his feeling and your feeling about the way the Egyptian Government viewed those people who lived in that area and what importance should be placed on their right to live and work.
Yeah I mean he was criticising this complete ignorance of the social problems… because he was much more in favour of a more social approach to such an area in general in urban planning- that was one thing. On the other hand he also had a very strong interest in preserving the historical architectural structures which were witness to the history of one of the capital cities of the Islamic empires…. different centuries and has very beautiful and excellent architecture actually. It's extraordinary, actually it has changed a bit now but at that time it hadn't been really taken care of. There was more money put into excavating sites instead of renovating mosques and so there naturally was a need to do it and he was also pretty much in favour of that solution to preserve the city as it was actually grown and had grown throughout the centuries and to stop it from being completely transformed by houses like 19th century houses being brought down and high rises being built because this was what was going on. He was also very interested in the aspect of the rent, of these contracts, because of the fact that the rents hadn't been written for several decades, because there were several laws for renting, but the fact that the people living inside the houses they would not have the money to take care for a house and the owner wouldn't have it either because the income he got from the rent wasn't high enough; so the owners have an interest to let the houses run down and they did sometimes on purpose, so that the people would have to leave because the house was in such a bad state that you could not live there any longer. So they let water run down the walls for example and there was a war going on between between lease holders and renters of the houses and Mohamed was thinking about ways of finding ways of changing the laws for renting houses in order to improve the situation as well for the house owners as for the people living in them.
Do you think it's fair to say he had a strong sense of social justice?
Well yeah it was very very strong. It was a very obvious strong sense of justice yeah.
In terms of…?
Well in terms of that it was very critical on the high class approach you know the classes in Egypt they are I mean the people were well off they do not care for the daily problems of the poor people and there are many poor people in Egypt, especially in Cairo and he was interested in finding ways to give them a better life or to organise the city in the space in a way and also social structure in a way that these people would do better actually.
And how did he feel the Government was dealing with those issues?
Well the Government was dealing with it terms of self-interest. I mean the Government was dealing it in terms of profit which was naturally the state profit in tourism which was very important. The Government was dealing with it also in terms of probably rather traditional neglect of the popular interests actually and so there was no… you couldn't see at that time an attempt of the Government to seriously solve these sorts of problems. They were just trying to relocate them and to make things better for their own income and Mohamed was very critical of this and this was actually linked to a strong critics of the Government in not really taking an interest in the own people's fate anyway but just in their own … interest in their own political career and in their financial enrichment and for this they would like just to cooperate with anybody and there was also naturally the link to critics of the Egyptian Government working out, cooperating directly with the US.
Can I ask you about that specifically then. Did he talk to you about a concern about how close the Egyptian Government had become in terms of their interests and the interests of the United States?
Yeah I mean we had several talks on that and it was not only on a political scale that he was arguing against this approach of the US Government's political and financial influence in general in Egypt, it was also on a cultural level actually that he was objecting this.
What do you mean on a cultural level?
I mean they work differently in Cairo then they do for instance in Washington and there were actually always conflicts of interest because there were also people that were Americanised in Cairo and these were probably the elites because they went to the American University in Cairo and Mohamed was very critical of these people because he felt that … he was pretty right about this that they were very much …Alienated actually …
Alienated from…
Alienated from the general Egyptian public because they were a very small group but they were very influential and they were actually strongly pro American and dependent on American financing and trying to live in America and coming back and there was this sort of…
…cultural imperialism sort of…
Yeah but this was not only like imperialism the way that… Egyptians who were working for this, you see I mean. Cultural imperialism is not that one side … was presented. There were always local elites whose interest it is to strengthen this influence. So he was critical of this and there was this other history of the politics of when already Egypt opened to a strongly western influence and they had a liberalisation of the markets and they went away from the most socialist economic approach … and he was also critical of this because he thought that this sort of market capitalism was not a good solution for a country, as Egypt has a very big population and poor population would not have the means to afford everything in the market could offer…
He was opposed to the adoption of a more free-market capitalist approach that Egypt had taken?
Well I mean no, he was opposed to it and he was also pointing to details of it. For instance they were producing….strawberries. They were producing strawberries on the Egyptian fields which were not produced for the Egyptian market and were exported to Europe for instance, while at the same time they would have to import food for their own people, like wheat from the US, which he considered absurd. You know there was the old country being used for producing high class luxury products for foreign markets and then they had to again import nutrition from other countries at a certain price again actually to nutrify their own population. It was completely absurd.
And he talked to you about this?
Yeah I mean we were discussing this as well. I mean at a certain point I could point to this problem and he was upset about it actually. He considered it grotesque to do something like that.
Why grotesque?
Yeah because you see it would be much more logical to cultivate wheat in your fields instead of cultivating strawberries there which nobody can afford in Egypt anyway…
At the time that you were there, well both the decade before that but during the time that you went to Egypt there was a very heavy crack down from the Egyptian Government on Islamic groups…
Was that something you talked about at all?
I only remember that we, I think we had a talk on that of which I do not remember many details. It was a very short [conversation] but apparently Mohamed had also talked before that with Volker Hauth about this problem while this thing was going on, and both Mohamed and Volker Hauth were very critical actually about this, because it was very rude military action they were taking. They were really storming different parts of the Cairo city in order to fight different extremist groups, which was a sort sort of street war going on… a crack down. There was lots of troops being involved and I mean this is something you can only find scary when this… and he was also critical of that naturally because I mean he was though in favour of extremist Islamic groups but he was pretty much against such a state action against people who are apparently working in favour of the interests of the people living in the streets so it was always a social conflict … you see because it was these people in these extremist groups in these quarters they were working they were also like taking care of the social needs of the people which the State did not cope with.
And that's the reason he thought it was wrong of the government to crack down on them because they were providing social services?
Yeah because they would not replace these services by anything, by any other services so they would just crack down on the organisations and that's it.
Did he strike you as a passionate person?
Well he was in a way yeah, he was passionate but at the same time he was very, he was calm so he was a serious and calm person but when he got upset about something he became passionate.
What made him most passionate?
Well at that time I remember there were two things made him passionate. One was actually the ongoing war in Yugoslavia, the Bosnian War especially which he considered a war actually of one population against the Muslim part of the population and he didn't understand why there was no help by the so called International community to prevent this murdering from going on, and this he was always linking to the war going on or the process going on in which he was very critical of because he considered it selling out of the interests of the Palestinian people as what had happened in Oslo. And he also links it to what had happened during the second Gulf War when the International lines attacked Saddam Hussein and which he was not in favour of Saddam Hussein. That was very clear because he considered Saddam Hussein also a politician but he was not in favour of his people in any way but he would not understand, he was very very angry about the fact that the international community would gather in order to attack Saddam Hussein but they would not gather in order to prevent the Israelis attacking Palestinians. They would not gather for any other problem as the one in Yugoslavia he was very afraid that there was a very strong bias in these politics and that these politics were always in the interests actually of the US and he was very critical of that, and I mean he also criticised the UN of being a sort of organisation which would always at the end of the day would only do what the US would ask for and not, never do anything against the US or against Israel.
When you said there were two things, was that the second thing?
Well the one thing was the US influence actually in the Middle East, the other thing was the Yugoslavian civil war and these were very hot topics he'd get upset about.
Did you think of him as a particularly religious person?
He was very religious as many others are in Cairo so he was particularly religious in terms of people I know and also of friends I use to have later on in Cairo though I had some more actually who were also as religious but not… in another way then so he was, he was very religious. He prayed five times a day and he used to listen to on the radio or on the cassette and but that was actually something very normal. I met many other people who were very similar to him then … then I met him in '94 he wasn't as religious as he had become in summer '95 already as far as I can observe it looking back.
What you felt he had changed just in that period of time he'd become more religious?
Yeah it had become more obvious, he would more show it towards the outside that he was religious.
How could you see that?
I mean firstly he had grown his beard by these days actually which later he apparently shaved again but as he came back he had grown a beard which we are more or less supposed to do …because you're not allowed to shave. He kept this beard for some months later on which is also quite, quite usual for these people to do and well he was so in this course, in how he talked about… religion to me, but this might not have been that he had become more religious, but maybe we just got to know each other better. So he started to talk with me more confidently on these matters actually and we had several discussions on religion because he had a very very conservative approach to Islam which is not unusual I mean considering what you are teached in the State school system in Egypt and he was always very shocked when… I was interested in Islam as one of many different cultures existing on the planet and I was also trying to compare phenomena in one religion and the other and he was always upset at certain things, which words I used actually which were not appropriate in the proper Islamic diction so I was not allowed to say it this way because then it would be wronged. It would be sinned if it would be this way. It was for instance when I said that it is interesting that you have ways of speaking, uttering only texts which if you look at [ceremonies like] in the Catholic Church when you have this way of pronouncing in a certain melody, and you have it in Judaism and prayer and you have it also in other religions and you have it in Islam… and when you read Koran you have a certain… I mean the way you read Koran, which is something like singing. Well I made the mistake to say singing and then he got really upset and because naturally singing is not allowed in his interpretation of… because music's something sinful in order to distract people from the right path and so …
So when you …
Singing would have been a sin already and you can't sing Koran and it was these things we were discussing and for him I was a sort of person he could confront because I was a sort of example …because I was a European, a German who had studied Middle Eastern studies and Islamic studies and so I was for him an example of somebody who approached another culture but did not really understand what was going on, because I said it in the wrong way and he always felt the urge to explain it how it was to be understood so I could understand his point of view but still scientifically it was not mine you see and so we never found a common ground on these.
Do you think that he resented the way that western culture for the most part does not understand Islam?
Yeah I mean that was one of his basic problems I think and that made things also very difficult for him in the long run to live in Hamburg because as religious and conservative in his religion as he was, it was difficult for him to communicate to other people who would not know enough actually about these issues and so there was a lack of of exchange I think and so he necessarily had to become more secluded on these issues I think when living in Hamburg and I think he was suffering from this because he felt really alienated…from his surrounding.
And do you think in a way, do you think he resented it and felt that the West doesn't make the effort to understand?
I mean he was very explicit about that, I mean they deliberately did not want to understand. That was his interpretation rather because it they had a certain interest, when there was a interest in the Middle East it was of political or financial interest and it was not about an equal or balanced exchange, so it was something like knowledge in order to gain power not knowledge in order to understand which was pretty close to imperial studies…. I mean, he was aware of this but he being very conservative and also a sort of essentialist from his side. This is what I was criticising on him because I realised that he was sometimes taking the constructs which were actually constructed by, for instance, Orientalists and was now saying that this was typical Islam whereas in the meantime it was much more critically viewed already in within scholarly approaches to Islamic studies because they had found out actually that … I mean it was only [the] picture they had constructed, and [they] had not considered all the different aspects that were there, so I was critical about his approach that he had this sort of moralistic approach to Islam. So Islam for him was one thing and not something with many different opportunities and options to act and to create culture.
What particular aspects of conservative Islam stood out for you in terms of that critique that you're saying you had of…
Well I mean for instance when we come back to the urban planning thing he was … of the idea of an Islamic city and also of an Islamic house which is a construct of Orientalists from the 19th and 20th century and he considered actually the ideal Islamic city to have things like like narrow dead end roads that have court yard houses and all this which you might find in one city, not find in another. You might even find it in all Islamic cities so you see if the question, if it's really Islamic or if it is a result of some much more complex cultural historical development.
But he wanted cities to be this idea of Islamic?
Yeah this was the idea of Islam and he even would have favoured to recreate these spaces so he was also in favour of these attempts in Saudi Arabia to build Islamic cities where they would have modern architecture but with courtyards and dead end roads so they would build new Islamic cities, which structurally and socially, naturally were not Islamic cities as old because Islamic cities were much more self organising then central so it was odd to do it this way.
And structurally now, it would be very difficult to achieve and not particularly good to live in.
Exactly I mean this for him was a task that could be solved by architects and by urban planners so naturally he knew that there were problems about this but it was something he was eager to work on. I mean this was one of his interests because he considered this city more appropriate for the people and for their daily life culture to live in.
Was there anything about your lifestyle that offended him?
No I mean he was he was very tolerant of this because he accepted that I was not an Egyptian nor a Muslim so I wasn't and he had nothing to complain about in general because in Egypt otherwise I behaved, I adopted to manners so there was no strong conflict actually. There were no proper critics actually of my behaviour.
Did you… I wasn't suggesting you'd done anything in particular by the way. There was nothing I was trying to suggest there but did you meet his family at all?
I think I met his family once because his father came to fetch us from the airport when we arrived but that's it. I didn't see them later on and Mohamed was living at his father's, at his family's place actually in Cairo and Volker Hauth and we had rented a flat in another part of Cairo so we just met during the day and the evenings for work but not …
So did you form any idea about their relationship or…
Within the family you mean? No I mean it appeared to be very unusual family structure… I mean he had left the family because he went to Germany so I think he wasn't that much any more like only the son of the family but he had become more independent by the time when he came back and lived with the family but I don't know any details about how this created problems or how the father's attitude was towards the son. I don't know.
In terms of his life what made him appear to you a conservative?
I mean he would follow all the duties that he had to follow as a believing Muslim concerning daily lives. He went to pray. He didn't drink alcohol and he wouldn't mess with women and I also realised that he was even criticising women … who were veiled for not wearing it properly because they wear it in a way that made them more beautiful instead of protecting them from male's eyes so he was, that was very conservative. This is where you could sense it especially in these sorts of criticisms he was saying about other people.
You were just saying those areas in which you felt that Mohamed was sort of obviously to you conservative and you were saying that sometimes it was about the way the women wore the Hijab. Was that when you were in Cairo?
We were in Cairo yes. I mean what would happen was, he would see women wearing a Hijab, and Volker Hauth and me for instance we would realise that it's looking good actually how they, how they do it. It's nice actually. It makes them beautiful. Then he was like saying yes, or he would criticise them because he was saying they would not wear the Hijab probably because they would choose certain colours which were too chic and they would like wear it or wind it in a way around their head that it would maybe make them even more attractive and so that was not the way it was supposed to be; or he would sometimes even say for himself. I mean not generally would he walk through the streets and point to people saying they wore the Hijab the wrong way but it was just close to the topic we were just talking about it was, he'd mention it or refer to it but …
So did he ever show any interest in women when you knew him?
I'm not informed about this thing anyway so I mean apparently there was a story that had been going on the year before, because sometimes Volker Hauth and then Mohamed were referring to it, talking about it but I have no idea, no details actually about it so.
This might be an inappropriate question but did you ever tease him about when he would say look, women shouldn't do that. Did you ever tease him and say, oh don't be such a conservative?
Well yeah, I mean naturally I would say like comments… exaggerate I mean they wear it as they want I mean as long as they are following the rules and he wouldn't agree…
Did you ever go to the engineer's syndicate?
Yeah. Sure because we had to meet some people there. I don't remember the names anymore.
Did you get a sense of the politics that were around?
Well I mean we talked about these politics naturally because the engineering syndicate was one of those that was increasingly being influenced by fundamentalist movements, I mean it was not only the engineer's one but several different ones as well were one of the political instruments the conservative or fundamentalists Muslims were using in order to increase their influence on state politics or on municipality because it was an organisation that was rather basic democratic, so people could bring people into places and pose where they wanted to be and it was not centrally controlled, but there was as far as I remember lots of critics about these processes going on by that time. There were people that were very critical about this change of politics within the syndicate because there were actually also many other people, engineers within the syndicates who did not like the syndicate to be instrumentalised for such a political direction.
And what did Mohamed think about it?
Oh no Mohamed was in favour of this idea. I mean in favour of this change.
The increasing Islamisation of the syndicate?
Yeah he was in favour of that because he was in favour of having a larger, a better lobby for Islamic social ideas and these things, so for him this was one of the necessary and important means to achieve this goal.
So do you think they were an important influence in terms of his developing ideas…The political ideas that were focused in the syndicate?
Well I'm not sure you know that he was linked up to the syndicate in a closer way because he had studied and then he left Egypt so generally you only get in contact with the syndicate after you have finished studies, and you start working and since he hadn't worked at least not for a long time there was probably no real possibility for the syndicate influencing his views. He might still have received or read something about them, because it was always in the newspapers because there was this discussion going on, on this process and so there were comments and interviews with people who were in favour of this and who were discussing the ideas actually that were behind it, so he knew what it was about and actually he was, he thinking about this and so there might have been influence, because he read about it and heard about it, but no direct personal influence of certain people within the syndicate I don't…
Do you remember going, do you remember any conversations or meeting any people who were from that Islamic group when you went? Do you remember what was talked about or anything about going to …
No there was, there was nothing from this. I mean and all the organisations or planning offices we went to h had no link to such an approach so I never observed that kind of conversation.
When you went back to Hamburg after the trip to Cairo did you keep in touch?
Well we kept in touch for a while because we still had to finalise our research results so I mean I stayed longer in Egypt, then I stayed for six months, even more so I came back only in early Spring '96 to Germany and we met up in Hamburg then for a weekend in order to discuss what we had already written and to coordinate what still had to be written and afterwards I only had for a certain while indirect contact because Volker Hauth was sometimes telling me about what Mohamed was doing but also Volker Hauth lost contact at that time to Mohamed. So I had contact with Mohamed after Spring of '96.
Did Volker Hauth tell you about how he was getting on or whether or not he seemed to be getting more …
No he remarked one time that he was now working for a company in Hamburg and that he was still studying and working … and these things you know. Volker Hauth didn't see him much either anymore so … even Volker Hauth couldn't tell me about him.
And do you think that was a sign of anything the fact that not even Volker Hauth was seeing him anymore or…
No I didn't take it as a sign no. I mean I don't know. I mean by then I naturally didn't take it for any sign when I mean it was just… I mean I couldn't be a good friend of his because we simply didn't find lots of common ground. So I mean I found him a nice person and when we met I mean I could deal with him and it was OK and I also enjoyed it but a as I was not living in Hamburg I mean I didn't think about continuing a long term friendship.
And not enough common ground anyway?
Yeah.
Because…
Well because we had such different ideas about aspects of religion and culture so … that was actually made it difficult but politically I mean we sometimes shared the same ideas so it was… and he being critical of certain political processes in Egypt and the Middle East and it was like we were disagreeing on some and then agreeing on some so it was …
Did he ever talk to you about what he wanted to be? What he wanted to go on and become?
Yeah naturally, I mean he wanted to work as an architect and city planner in Cairo and he was very serious about it and hoped actually to be able to improve the situation and to find a place in the system where he would be able to influence the situation. Which naturally is not easy if you look at the structures which are pretty much controlled by …nepotism and so …
Did he feel that? That it would be hard?
Yeah I mean we talked about this problem also during our stay in Cairo. I mean he was aware of it before, and he got even more aware of it when we were there again and so I think in a way he was still hopeful. He still wished and hoped that he might find such work in Cairo but he was sceptical about the possibility of really changing things in Egypt and finding good and sensible work.
Because of…
Well because if you are critical of certain persons or certain political circumstances, if you don't know this and that person you will never get this sort of job that's why.
It's an obvious question but I want to ask I mean what did you feel when you opened the newspaper and saw his name.
I certainly wouldn't believe it. I mean I saw his picture in the newspaper. This is actually how it started, yes so we had this newspaper on our table and I looked at it. It was early in the evening and I seen this photo of a person on the title page and I was stunned because I thought, I know this person so I looked at it closely, it really looked like Mohamed El-Amir so I looked under the photo what was written there and it said it was a person Mohamed Atta who was supposed to have been the pilot of the first plane to crash into the World Trade Centre but there was no more information about this, and I didn't believe that it was him. I just thought maybe they made a mistake and they got this photo from somewhere or they took him for another person who apparently was linked to it or so I was looking for different explanations for how come this person I knew and which I would never expected to do such a thing could now be linked to this attack.
What happened then was that an hour later I got a phone call from Volker Hauth in Hamburg who had found out my telephone number via my parents and because we hadn't been in contact anymore since 98; and the moment that he called me I already knew what it was about because I mean there could be only one reason why Volker Hauth would now call me, and then I tried to find out when he was telling me that he had already contacted the police because he knew the person but he was also convinced that it couldn't have been him actually. He wanted to be in contact with the police in order to deliver proof that Mohamed is not the sort of person who would do a suicide attack and such a murder, and well this is how it started and I mean it took me quite a while because I was still also very sceptical about the whole idea of you know only Arab names listed as suspects actually…it was too outspoken.
The reaction was too outspokenly anti-Arab from the beginning. I mean from everything you would observe from the outside, you would not have the inside information and know the signs were clear enough, but this was also the reaction which was going around here. Maybe funny to say that everybody, all of my friends here they all, even people in the street I mean they were, many of them were really shocked, they wouldn't believe what was going on. There was only very few people who were like saying, I mean they hit the Pentagon and…very scared of what would happened afterwards because nobody knew actually who did it and then when the question, the question was obvious who did it and they all said it couldn't have been Arabs, never; because they wouldn't have the financial means, they wouldn't have the skills and…People wouldn't just believe that this was done by Arabs. Everybody hoped it was not the Arabs …because it would just make the situation worse and they all hoped, there were all these ideas that it was the Japanese Red Army who did it as a revenge for Pearl Harbour attack and these so everybody was constructing different solutions. All that it has been Osama who was behind it because I mean who would profit from this at all, and so people [found it very difficult] to believe what had been going on there.
And for you?
For me it was similar in a way, although I mean everything is speculation. We simply do not know what happened though, and from what happened then and how quickly actually research was focused on a certain group of Arab passengers in the plane I also found, I had this sense that there was interest behind it actually to focus on these sort of people and there was at least from what you observed from the press you had the, you got the impression that everybody was hoping in the US that it was the Arabs or the Muslims; whereas I and many other people here that would say that maybe it was an inner American thing because we all thought of Oklahoma I mean you know one of the biggest bombing was in the US was done by a US citizen and he had nothing to do with Islam so that was one of the very probable solutions that anybody had for the question like who was it? And then it was just like following what was going on and I started having these phone calls from journalists from places all over the world but …
What do you think now though? I mean have you in a sense come to terms with the fact that maybe the Mohamed that you knew did fly this plane?
Well I think it's difficult to really come to terms with it because the Mohamed I knew would not have done it so he must have changed a lot afterwards and I have no idea because I had no contact with him, what happened to him and when exactly and …
Do you think about that? What must have happened?
Yeah, naturally I think about it but I can't know. I mean I can't figure it out although from how I knew him, you know the only thing that I believe would have made him do such a thing would have been political reasons and not religious, because from a religious stand he was a very humanist person but he got really upset and extreme in his judgments when it came to politics and so I think it must have been something political rather, and maybe I think Robert Fisk actually he wrote an article these days in which he linked up and he made a very good remark which was that after Mohamed apparently wrote this testament of his, his last will was apparently written in April '96, exactly the month of the massacre when the Israelis bombed the UN Refugee camp in Southern Lebanon and several hundred civilians had died and there was no big published negative response to it. I mean Israel was like … don't do this again but nothing more happened. You can understand somebody being upset about this you know there might be a link really because…
The timing is such that… you believe there could have been a link. No one can prove it but…
The timing is such.
But you believe there could have been a link.
We can't prove it now anymore, because I mean who would tell us.
What did you think when you read the will?
Well I didn't read the will completely, but I found it odd. I mean I didn't understand it really. I mean some of the things were the usual and others were really a little bit weird but I do not know the details.
It just seemed strange to write it so early…
That is what surprised me you see. I mean it was when he wrote it in Spring 96, because that was still the time when I knew him or at least when I just had got out of contact with him and by that time you know he didn't appear to me as such a person who might feel the urge to write his last Will and this sort of last Will …I would have thought the thing to take much more time, to have been taken place later, so I was really surprised when they said that the last Will was written in '96.
As far as you know, was he ever a member of any Islamic Group?
Oh I have no idea. I don't know. I can't say. I mean he never talked about being a member of a group and I didn't observe him meeting people or going to the same places, or there was no hint of this actually. I mean he had like this this naturally this ex pat group in Hamburg he was, he was praying with which is a very normal thing for Muslim ex pats living in other countries because they have to join to pray, so I mean … has to be has to be done in a group and not alone, so this is why it is necessary for them to form a group to do it actually.
Was there ever anything about the decadence that there is in a city like Hamburg that you felt Mohamed ever expressed to you, sort of offended by the decadence of the West as exhibited in Hamburg or anywhere?
No I don't remember that he referred directly to such a thing. I mean it was rather indirectly of how he would expect a proper Muslim women to behave that maybe you could sense the critic towards, towards western ways of dressing maybe, of behaviour which he even would have, like in Egypt against women who were not wearing Hijab or wearing or carrying clothes like jeans or t-shirts - this was actually what he was referring to. I mean I only spent one weekend in Hamburg when I met him so I think because his critics were often not very much context related so he would not tell us about his critics, about life in Hamburg when we were in anther place. There was nothing like that. He maybe did but just didn't mention it to me.
So you don't remember times when he would talk an American movie or an American style of food?
No, no no there was nothing like that actually. I mean it was, he was not that anti whatever western in that way I mean … it was rather a thing of live and let live approach maybe that was behind it.
One of the extraordinary things about all of them was that they were able to do this, plan this for a number of years… Do you think he had that capacity to be able to lead a separate life?
Yeah I mean on the one hand… I mean there are like two questions. I considered him able to organise and to plan such a thing. I mean not because it is a crime but because he was good at organising and he was also a person who could lead other people so he could be a leader type of guy and take decisions and be [good] in organising things. The second part of the question is, could he do this in a secret part of life, which apparently he did. I don't… so he was able to do it, which you couldn't know before exactly because he was able to do it so…
How does that make you feel about you, you knew him.
Yeah I mean I ask myself, naturally if he was already this sort of person who would have done this, when I knew him or not but as far as I knew him then, he was not the kind of person, so this is why I say there should have been this change going on with him but it was surprisingly early as you said, that he already wrote this last Will in early '96; so there I naturally question myself, if he was already thinking about this things or planning something already or meeting people early on, but then he managed to do this without anybody of us remarking and it leads me to the question like how far can you know a person at all? It's if you think you know him already and you can judge in general his his kind of personality but I never had the impression by that time that he had a certain path or second or secret life.
At the other end naturally I didn't grasp the whole of his life which is very normal because I was new to the Egyptian contacts then; I mean there were many things strange to me or things that I had to get to know or understand and to learn what they meant and so I'm probably the wrong person to ask if he had a sort of life which I would not know about or understand. I mean this question could only be answered by a person from his surroundings, from his Egyptian surroundings, which would know how people would act in a normal way. Or if he had something which was conspicuous or…
But it does make you ask yourself how well can you ever know somebody?
Yeah actually it's not that I'm really suffering from this question because I still think that Mohamed … that I had understood or known him quite well or to an extent so I think I mean it's probably that he changed later on.
do you feel that in some ways you can understand, or speculate about the unhappiness that must have led someone to the despairing view of the world that you'd have to do something like that?
Well I don't think it was in isolation, if he was that isolated. I think I mean he was naturally able to communicate with people on a more daily level because he was working in this company in Hamburg and it was not that he was completely isolating himself there. So he was also doing things on his own and he was going to pray and he would not enter into religious discussions with people because naturally he would feel completely alone because he would be the only person having this [sort] of idea about his religion, and generally it's difficult to discuss issues of especially Islam and Islamic religion in Germany for instance or any western country because there are so many prejudices and before you can start to make people really understand what it is about, you're running into so many prejudices and people just won't stop actually believing the prejudices more than what you say.
So it is a very very difficult situation and it gets even more difficult when you are a religious person and I think this is why he surely wouldn't really talk about religion, which was apparently an important part of his life. He had a very 'disconservative' stand which was growing apparently more extreme, actually was isolating this, and he might have looked for other people he could share something with, but still, this way of isolation will not give a reason at least which I can understand, [why he would take such an action]. That would rather facilitate the impossibilities of planning it, but it would not be the reason for it.
Basically it speaks of frustrated rage.
Yes it's frustrated rage and frustration coming from very different origins, for very different reasons actually and I mean this is the only explanation I have for this. And as I said I could sense this sort of frustration and rage especially in in his political critics about what was going on in the world especially in the bias politics against Muslims, as he would have regarded it. We had these discussions also I remember once, that we talked about the role of the UN in the Iraq conflict and in Czechoslovakia and he was very [ ] in his criticism against the UN that it was outspokenly anti Islamic… interesting actually that somebody would consider the UN politics outspoken and anti Islamic, I tried to make him understand that it might appear, the politics might appear anti Islamic because they are guided by other interests, by countries which are not Islamic and so they just follow their interests and that the way to see it as something outspokenly anti Islamic is just the effect of somebody who was victimised by it and who feels that this is directed against him but it's just directed against nobody in particular. It's just in favour of their own interests but not against somebody and so I tried to convince him that he was taking actually the Islamic aspect as too important in this political game because it was not anti Islamic politics but it was if at all a pro American or pro capitalist country politic.
Could he see that?
Then third world countries, which in this part of the world happen to be Muslim countries fall victim too and this is the thing. I mean but no he didn't really see that.
He couldn't, didn't want to, couldn't...
Well I mean he saw my point and he was thinking about it, but he still was believing that there was something in what he had said or that there was actually these anti Islamic motives behind certain politics of the UN and the US.
That the UN was specifically anti Islamic?
Yeah. Not in everything they did but they were doing things which apparently were anti Islamic.
Rather than just pro western you mean?
Yeah, but this brings me to another sort of what I observed in the last weeks because in everything you could read in the newspapers and many things that you would hear on the radio would always see people looking for the motivations of what Mohamed did in his religion and everybody was trying to pin it down on the fact that they were Muslims doing this and I think this is completely off the track because these people did not do this because they were Muslims. The way probably they argued it or they were defending their motivations they were using, they were doing it within the Muslin discourse because this is the context they are referring to but the motivations, the reasons for it are not the religion is nothing which forces them to do something like this. To the contrary you would find the majority saying you know, you are forbidden to do this because they were innocent people killed and this is something which his not allowed especially from the [Islamic] point of view so it is political actually, in that it's political action and political motivation behind it and this can not be used to the fact you know that Islam has something about it which makes somebody a killer in a certain point of time; but it is rather like that world political structure has something about it which makes some people become killers at a certain point of time out of frustration. I think this is much more the point we have to look for if you ask why is a person like Mohamed Atta did something like this.
Volker Hauth Interview
Hamburg, Thursday 18 October, 2001
source: Four Corners, Monday 12 November, 2001 ABC TV
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/atta/interviews/hauth.htm
Liz Jackson interviews Volker Hauth, who knew Atta well during the years he studied in Hamburg, and accompanied him on several trips to the Middle East.
…Now the government tried to convert this very lively road to a pedestrian zone and they tried to push out the local population. They were obliged to live in one of the new cities which are built in Egypt. Our opinion was that these plannings were not the right way to take care of the specific structure you may find in the inner city of Cairo but it was quite difficult to tell this opinion openly.
Mohamed told us it may cause problems for him if we showed our professional opinions to open cause he wanted to, after studying in Germany, he wanted to return to Egypt and he wanted to work in Egypt and in Arabia. He always was, that was my impression, after what he said, he was always in danger of being criminalised. He was member of the syndicate of the engineers and as he told me, I asked him about fundamentalism and Islamism and he told me about the Muslim Brotherhood that many members of the syndicate of advocates and of engineers are members of the Muslim Brotherhoods.
He was no member of the brotherhood but by this I got the impression that the members of the brotherhood do not stand aside of the society they are more part of the intelligency of the population and Egyptian President or the Egyptian government tried to give the impression that all members of the Muslim Brotherhood are criminals and are people of less education or of mean education and like Mohamed Atta how he called Mohamed Al-Amir told me the opposite was real, was true…
And when you say he was concerned that he would be criminalised, why was that?
He told me about the daily practice of the government to criminalize people of a said opinion. Egyptian and especially the Egyptian President, Mubarak tries to give the impression that Egyptian is a democracy, is a free democratic country in the western sense of democracy and freedom but Mohamed told me that it was not possible to give or to tell open oppositional opinion. Most governors or most presidents of Egypt have belonged to the army before and from my own experience in the army, I have the impression people coming from the army have a look of black and white. There is nothing between. You have friends or you have enemies and in Egypt you either may have the same opinion like the government or you are an enemy of the government. The real opposition like you have in the democracies of the western states or in the western world, you can't find in Egypt. There is no real opposition and…I did not get the impression that these are true elections in a democratic sense.
Was Mohamed a member of the engineer's syndicate?
Yes, he was a member of the engineer syndicate. In Germany I am a member of the engineer's syndicate also. It's necessary to be allowed to work as architect, you have to be a member of the syndicate, even also in Germany like in Egypt. But he told me he was no member of the Muslim Brotherhood.
But he told you that he thought that there were particular problems for the Muslim Brotherhood in the syndicate or that they were an important part of the syndicate…
No. Members of the syndicate, or many members of the syndicates were members of the brotherhoods and most seemed from the opposite, most members Muslim Brotherhood were members of the syndicate of lawyers or advocates and engineers.
Did he talk to you about the crackdown that there was on the Islamists and particularly on the Muslim brotherhoods in those syndicates?
The manner, the Egyptian government used the expression fundamentalist, Mohamed told me was very superficial and schematic attempt to criminalise all people with opposite opinions.
Did he say that particularly within the Engineer's Syndicate, within the profession that he wanted to work?
No, no. This attempt to criminalize people was not concentrated on one of the syndicates, he told me it was a general problem of the Egyptian government to push away all people with opposite opinions and Mohamed was a very well educated person and he was a religious person and both people with religious orientation and people with a very high education all around the world may have opposite opinions than the government of the country they live in and by this he was in danger of being criminalised. Only by having a different opinion. This was my impression of what Mohamed told me.
And when you say a religious person, what do you mean?
I did not have the impression of being fanatic but it was a very strict religious orientation. He had his prayer five times a day and he practiced Ramadan. I don't know if he had taken part at the Haj, if he travelled to Mecca, he didn't tell me. But I didn't get the impression of being fanatic. He was very strict but not fanatic. You may know Muslims do not have any sense of humour concerning religion in the Christian religion, there is a special sense of humour concerning religion if you know Monte Python or attempts like this to have a new view on religion, in the Islamic religion, this is not possible.
Do you think he did have a sense of humour generally?
He had a sense of humour, yes we joked about governments, the Syrian government and we travelled together to Syria a year before and we joked about this. It was possible to laugh about, especially about politics.
Can you remember the first time that you met Mohamed?
Yes we met in a seminar about planning and building in development countries at the University and Mohamed was very interesting person for me cause I've been in Egypt and Palestine two times before and this was a good opportunity to get more informations and to get better impressions of this country I have travelled before. We began to work together at the end of 1994 and we prepared a journey to Syria to Aleppo where we studied life and structure of the old city of Aleppo. A very characteristic old city. It's comparable only with the old city of Cairo and these were the main interest of Mohamed, the traditional structure and the daily life, the mixture of traditional structure and actual daily life in these old Islamic inner cities of Aleppo and of Cairo because he was interested in the specific structure of these old cities. In former times, there was no separation of political and religious life in Arabia. In the western world, we have the separation of the political life on the one side and the religion on the other side and in former times, also in Europe, but in former times in Arabia, this was some kind of unity, Mohamed told me and these old cities and these Islamic old cities you get a very lively impression how the daily life may have been from the time. This was the main interest of Mohamed. He studied the German language with very much discipline and he spoke very fine or his knowledge of German language was excellent. I do not remember any specific hobbies but I think to have hobbies is a special quality of western life and it's a special quality of rich and handsome western life. In Arabian countries young people meet but do not have time and they do not have money for practicing hobbies like you have in the western world. The daily life is much more working or meeting friends and sitting together. It's not playing tennis or playing golf. That's part of the life of the so-called fat cats in the Egyptian population or young population you have different groups and the group with the highest income, are the so-called fat cats, these are families with narrow relations to the government. It's astonishing that people or persons belonging to the government in Egypt are also leaders or managers of national companies.
What did Mohamed feel about what you're calling the fat cats?
He told me about different groups of the population of Egypt beginning with the Infitah, Infitah means the opening of the Egyptian politics, to the western world. President Sadat began with this policy to open the economy to the western world and in this time a few families, especially families or clans increased their income and these families with the close contacts to the government of the so-called fat cats income of these families is absolutely incomparable to the income of, for example, of academics. If you know that in that a teacher of a high school earns about 350 German marks a month that are about 175 US dollars and other persons in Egypt may afford new Mercedes cars, there's a gap between the academic world and the world of the persons working in the industry or leading managing companies… the income of the poor people is incomparable maybe 50 dollar dollars a month or 100 dollars a month.
What did Mohamed feel or say to you about that gap between the rich and the poor?
He was not happy about the injust or unfair way of living and of distribution of a wellness and income. His idea was to have income for anybody to have the opportunity to survive with health and good education but many are a big part of the Egyptian population can't take part in the daily life of the better off and many people do not have the opportunity to give a good o education to their children. Many children have to work because they do not earn enough money and the interest of Mohamed and his professional work was to increase the circumstances of the poor people. This was my impression…. His first study was architecture and for architects all around the world, it's possible to make much money if you work for the better off but architecture is not only a technical science, it's also a social science and for this Mohamed continued his first study with studying urbanism and town planning because of his interest of social life.
Living here in Hamburg, he obviously experienced a western style of living, saw it directly. Did he ever talk to you about how he felt about a more western style of living, what he thought about that?
I do not remember exactly what he told me. He didn't take part in many affairs of the western world. He made some sports but most of the time he studied and he was in contact with Arabian friends. It was a strange world for him, a strange language. Strange daily life for a religious orientated person. Most of Germans are not used to pray and daily… I don't think he had many relationships to the German or to the western world. He studied the western world and he studied the policy, the democratic practices.
Do you think anything that the western world had to offer or has to offer appealed to him?
Yes I get the impression that he was interested in the German way. I don't know about his opinions of the American life, but that he was interested in the German way, the German attempt to spread or to distribute prosperity or to reach prosperity for all members of the community. For all parts of the population. That's an old principle… of the Muslim world that anybody may take part in the daily life that anybody has enough to survive that anybody has the opportunity to get educated. It's an idea of the Muslim or of the Islamic world.
I guess I also meant, did anything of the more hedonistic things that the western world has to offer appeal to him?
He was not interested in this I think. He was not interested in cars or in, no I don't remember this…
I mean movies, nightclubs
No, nothing at all.
Girls? Any of the things that the west, the freedoms that, a personal lifestyle that the west offers attractive.
I think freedom and the possibility to tell your opinion openly was of great interest for him or it was of big interest for him but all these good of the western world like you told me cars, girls, motor cycles, or things like that, he was not interested in.
Television, movies?
I don't know if he had a TV set. No I don't think so and I don't remember him going to the movie.
Ever?
Can't remember.
Music?
We spoke about music cause I'm interested in music and I like playing music and he told me for Muslims it is not allowed to listen to music or to enjoy music in the way people from the western world enjoy music because of the impact of music. If you have a look to the young people dancing, very loud music, the impact is comparable to the impact of drugs and this is not allowed to Muslims.
And what did he think that that music might make them do or feel?
It may have the impact of a sedative or the opposite impact of … stimulants and the stimulation of Muslim or other the root and the base of the stimulation of the Muslim is the belief.
It sounds such a strict way to live.
Yes. He lived in a much more strict way than person from the western world, that's right. But that doesn't mean that he couldn't enjoy anything. He enjoyed sweets or he enjoyed laughing, walking around meeting friends, meeting, being in company with friends. That's one of the joys of Arabian people. Arabs do not like to be alone like western people.
Did you meet many of his friends here?
We met some of his friends on the street and he told me this is so and so and we shook hands and changed some words but I do not remember or any of his friends. Also in Egypt we met some friends on the street but we did not get in close contact with his friends.
Did you feel close to him?
Yes.
What do you think was the bond, what was it that made you feel close to him?
My religious orientation is not as strict as his orientation, his religious orientation was but I think the interest in religious ideas, my interest in religious ideas was some kind of bridge to his religious opinions and to his religious practice. People with strict religious practices and religious orientation, a traditional religious orientation is quite difficult to get in contact with people who do not have an idea of religion and many of the other students did not have an idea of religion.
And that was a bond between you?
Yes. I think so.
How long did you know him for?
We met in 1993 and the last time I met him was about 1996 or 1997.
Can you remember the last time that you saw him?
We met in the street or in the bus, some kind like that and spoke only shortly. We hadn't seen for some month and I didn't get the impression of a change or something like that.
But what happened, how come you didn't see him again?
My study finished and in Germany when a student's work, they study and they work and the same time and in the later semesters if you're near to the diploma you do not go to the University daily….Some of the students go to the university only once a week or two weeks and then I change my flight, first I lived in Hamburg and then I changed to the northern part of Hamburg and by this we didn't meet like we met before.
Were you surprised that you had no contact at all? I am curious because you were close and he was still here till the year 2000… you seemed to have some sort of bond and good strong discussions about religion and politics so that's why I ask, it just seemed like, to suddenly end … perhaps you might have been a big loss for him in terms of someone that he could relate to.
Maybe. It was not a sudden loss….We worked together until 1996 but we worked not very closely. We had to write a report about the time in Cairo but we did not meet as often as before because we both had to work and by this our ways went aside…
Was there a period of time in which over a period of time, did you think that he changed in the kind of person he was from when you first met him?
When I first met him about 1993, he did not wear a beard, and in about 1995, end of 1994, suddenly he had a beard and I also have a beard and by this I asked him what about your beard and he told me all people wearing a beard in Egypt are thought to be fundamentalists and due to this in solidarity with all people criminalised in Egypt now. He wanted to wear a beard also. He didn't want to hide his personal opinions, religious people have a beard in Egypt and if you do not want to be criminalised or if you don't want to have problems, you can't your beard but Mohamed told me … he wanted to show his opinions freely, openly and he didn't want to hide his opinions. That was one of the qualities I liked and I didn't get the impression of Mohamed being a sleeper, a so-called sleeper. In the years I met and I knew him he was not, or he didn't act like a sleeper. He showed his opinions openly, we spoke about politics, we spoke about the western world. He showed his scepticism about the western world, we spoke about Israel and the Israel politics and also here he showed openly his scepticism and his critique and I did not get the impression of Mohamed trying to hide anything.
When you say his scepticism about the western world, what do you mean by that?
There was one example I don't remember the year exactly but once a western nation, I'm not sure if this was America or European nation, sent a ship with rubbish to Egypt and Mohamed told me he didn't like this. That the rich western nations exported their rubbish to the poor Arabian nations. This was one example of critique and I think the critique was just and fair. We spoke about the politics of Israel and the USA or the symbiotic relationship of Israel and the USA and he was very unhappy not to be allowed to visit Jerusalem. For a Muslim Jerusalem is one of the holy places and as Egypt he was not allowed to visit this holy place and he was quite unhappy about this cause I told him I have been there twice.
Did he feel strongly about the Palestinian issue?
I asked him about the problem, it was not him talking about it and he was not happy about the politics of Arafat he did not like the attempt to find a way or the attempts Arafat made cause he had the impression that Arafat gave away too much.
He thought Arafat compromised too much?
Yes. That was his impression, that's also my impression.
So he was in a sense more hardline than Arafat?
I won't call him a hardliner
I thought I might have used the wrong word. Do you think he was a person who liked a compromise?
Yes, that was one of his main qualities to find compromise, to communicate. I have got one image if the right door is closed, he tried to use the left door. There's no way on the right side, you have to take the left side to reach the target and I travelled with him in Syria and in Egypt and I got the impression that his capability of communicate with different people was extremely good.
At some point when he was in Hamburg, something must have happened, do you take that view and if so is there anything now that points to you about when that was?
Being asked of any or for any explanations of what happened in New York, and the first moment I thought of the visit of Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. By this he threatened a holy place of the Islamic world and threatening or damaging a holy place is a sacrilege and it may have been answered by threatening and damaging the holy place of the western world and from the view of an Arab, from the view of a Muslim, the World Trade Centre in New York is a holy place for the western world and this may be or this may show an interrelationship and this visit of Ariel Sharon giving fire to the oil or burning the oil may have been the last drop, the water overflowing.
Did Mohamed ever talk to you about what he really wanted to do, like what were his dreams?
Yes he told me he wanted to work for an international organisation of corporation and development because in being member of an international organisation, he wouldn't have been in danger of being imprisoned, he wanted to work in Egypt, he wanted to work in Arabia as a planner, as an urbanist, but he wanted to be saved of being criminalised. And this was his dream to work in Egypt.
He had a real fear that he would be put in prison for his religious strengths?
No it was not the fear of being imprisoned but it was a fear not be allowed to say what he meant and for well educated person, it's some kind of torture not to be allowed to tell what your confessions are. You know about the so-called inner exodus, many persons living in a country with a very restrictive political systems, live in the so-called inner exodus, they don't tell what they think but they can't make him happy any day than Mohamed wanted to live in Egypt, he wanted to live in Arabia and he wanted to become happy. And not being allowed telling or showing the inner opinions, not having the opportunity to show the professional knowledge he had would be some kind of torture.
Did he think that he would ever be able to realise and do what he wanted to do, did he ever talk about his fear of not being able to realise and do what he wanted to do?
No he didn't tell this.
Being frustrated?
I got the impression of depression that I think that's a special quality of many academics or of the intelligentsia of Egypt.
When you say depression, what, what was it about to him that made you say that?
The problem of the academic world in Egypt and the problem of Mohamed was that in Egypt it causes problems to show your confessions, to show your knowledge, your professional knowledge openly. In Egypt I get the impression that many academic people or people of academic education are very depressed and in Egypt you have an exodus of academics. Many academics of Egypt would like to leave the country to work in other countries to have a job and to work concerning to their beliefs and to their knowledge and not always thinking of what hasn't the government told us and what have I tell now not to get in conflict with the government or the police.
So it was a general thing rather than a feeling that he was, was there anything about his manner that made you feel he was depressed, frustrated, angry?
I don't think it was special quality of or a symptom of Mohamed, it was a general problem of Egypt that people were not like that it causes problems to show knowledge and confessions of ….
Did you meet his family when you were there?
We met the father at the airport. He took us to the flat where my German colleague and I lived and we met two aunts in Kafir el-Sheikh where Mohamed comes from but I didn't meet the mother and the sister.
Some people have said to us that it was a very high achieving family and that his father had big expectations of Mohamed. Did you ever have that impression, did he ever talk to you about having in some sense to live up to his father's expectations?
No, we didn't talk about this. His father had different profession and professional prospective of advocates and architects or planners are incomparable.
I want to ask you about something, I'm sure you've been asked about it many times, in terms of any interest that he had in women, I understand there was one time when you were with him in Aleppo, can you tell us about that time?
No, I don't want to repeat this.
Because you don't think it's true or…?
No. It's of few words, it was lean mean, mean value. He wanted to have a family, I get the impression and he did not have a girlfriend, but he told me, I asked him about a girlfriend and he told me in Egypt his family and the family of a young lady, thought of starting a relation…but and I told him about a relationship, about being married and he told me it was not yet time to get married….His interest was to study and to finish his studies first and then to have a family. I get the impression he wanted to have a family.
And in the meantime he thought that having girlfriends was not appropriate?
No in Arabia the life of young people is totally different from the life of young persons or young people in the western world, it's not that the way like young men and young ladies or young women, the western world may meet in a café or stayed together for a night or so in Egypt it's more strict. You are not allowed to meet a girl you're not married with and the religious orientated families and by this Mohamed had no idea of having a girlfriend.
There was no idea of getting in contact with a young girl or a young lady in the western sense.
When it became more and more apparent that it was in fact Mohamed who had flown the plane into the World Trade Centre, what did you think must have happened to the Mohamed that you knew?
For a long time I couldn't imagine that Mohamed had taken part in this terroristic act and also now I didn't find a reason, an exact reason, you can't find any exact reason for what happened but there are no clear hints which may lead to this what happened. His personal bitterness and depression are no sufficient hints for this act. There are no hints or you may try to have an explanation but I couldn't find a sufficient explanation for what happened and for Mohamed taking part in this act even.
Did he ever talk to you about America?
Maybe, I couldn't remember a specific situation talking about Americans, he didn't show any fanaticism against America, his critique and his scepticism was orientated against the separation of the Egyptian population which means that the western style of living gets in contact or confrontates with the traditional way of living but that's an inner Egyptian problem or he gave the impression that he was interested in the Egyptian life, the daily life and the threatening of the traditional life by western ideas.
So you felt that in some sense the west was invading culturally invading or taking over the Islamic way of life?
Yes. That's daily life in Egypt.
Did he speak to you about that?
We spoke about that, yes. The industrial nations do not only export cars or tanks or things like that, they do not only export rubbish, they also export their way of living. It's quite opposite to the traditional way of living in an Islamic country or is in an Arab country.
And do you think Mohamed resented that?
Mohamed was not very happy of this cause the western kind of living and the traditional way of living, there is no co-existence, it's a confrontation in Egypt. If you tried to live in the traditional way you get problems. You get many points and you will be confrontated. If you built houses in the traditional way, you touch the interests of the industry who tries to sell the western products of modern building and you will find many examples of confrontation of the traditional way of living on the way side and the western way of living on the other side. And these are not only problems of religion, these are also problems of technique and problems of money. If you try to find solutions, therefore daily life, if you try to find cheap techniques for daily life of the bigger part of the population, you threaten the interest of companies, of western companies to sell expensive techniques, for example air condition or things like that.
And did he talk to you about things like that?
Yes we spoke about this because planning towns, planning houses means to discriminate between modern technique and old technique. You have to think about costs and the modern technique is much more expensive and many are a big part of the Egyptian population can't afford the western techniques and by this big part of the Egyptian population can't take part at the daily life.
What do you think when people just say anybody who did that must just be mad, must be a psychopath?
I think that's right. You can't find intellectual explanation for what happened. You can find an explanation for depression and you can find an explanation for bitterness and sadness but you can't find an intellectual explanation for this terroristic act, something in the mind must have changed totally that any intellectual thought has been switched off. That's my opinion.
So that must be what happened.
I think so. It's a psychological problem or individual psychological problem led to a very narrow view of the world. May have led to a very narrow view of the world which has come closer or which may have been focussed on an attempt to solve problems by such terroristic acts.
He never talked to you about people resorting to violence, he never discussed with you terrorism?
No, Mohamed was a very peaceful person searching for justice and I didn't ever get the impression that violence was a manner of or was a medium of reaching targets.
But he never referred to other acts, mean of say Palestinians suicide?
No, and by this I couldn't imagine that he took part this terroristic act.
訂閱:
意見 (Atom)