Le texte ne s’affiche pas intégralement dans la langue que vous avez sélectionnée ? La Boîte à outils ne cesse d’évoluer, et il semblerait que nous n’ayons pas encore totalement traduit cet article. Contactez-nous si vous avez envie de traduire de nouveaux textes!
En bref
A violent attack on protesters in Tahrir Square by pro-regime, camel-riding thugs was a turning point in the Egyptian revolution, generating popular support for the protesters and leading to the fall of Mubarak.
On February 2, 2011, in a desperate attempt to disrupt the masses of protesters who were occupying Cairo’s central Tahrir Square, thousands of baltajiah attacked protesters using stones, knives, and Molotov cocktails. Many rode camels, mules, and horses and used swords, sticks, and whips to attack the demonstrators. New fighting erupted again the next day involving live ammunition and rubber bullets.
Preliminary reports of a post-revolutionary fact-finding committee found that key members of the regime were behind the baltajiah who led this battle, demonstrating once again how convenient it is for those in power to get civilian thugs to do their dirty work for them.
The people had answered the plight of the people.
Though the aim of the attack was to abort the revolution, quite the opposite happened. The attack instead provoked a massive wave of sympathy and support. The murder of nearly a dozen protesters and the wounding of 2,000 others created a public outcry, which led millions of people to take to the streets and join the Tahrir Square sit-in, forcing decades-long dictator Hosni Mubarak to step down nine days later.
The Battle of the Camel was a turning point in the Egyptian revolution. But it could have gone either way. What factors caused it to be a victory for the people? One was the resilience and bravery of the protesters. The thugs were each paid 200 Egyptian pounds to carry out the attacks, but the protesters’ strong belief in their right to “bread, freedom, and social justice” was much sturdier than any monetary incentive. They not only held their ground, but also capitalized on the attack to expand and escalate the revolution.
For the first seven days of the occupation of the square there was no indication that the regime was willing to compromise. People were beginning to feel that their efforts were not bearing any fruit. But the attack showed that the regime was hysterical and had run out of options (see: PRINCIPLE: The real action is your target's reaction). Despite the blood in the streets, it gave protesters a huge morale boost.
The protesters began calling upon their friends and relatives, marching through the alleyways, pleading with their Egyptian brothers and sisters to come to their rescue. And they did. The brutality of the regime provoked hundreds of thousands who were sitting on the fence and watching the revolution from afar to take to the streets and join the sit-in in Tahrir Square (see: PRINCIPLE: Anger works best when you have the moral high ground).
At dawn of February 2, there were 30,000 thugs and 25,000 protesters. By the afternoon, the number of protesters reached 300,000, and by nightfall there were a million protesters in the streets of Egypt. The people had answered the plight of the people in a surge of solidarity (see: THEORY: Al faza’a [a surge of solidarity]).
Originally published in Beautiful Rising.
Théorie clé
The Battle of the Camel is one of the most infamous examples of baltajiah in action. A marginalized group was paid an insignificant amount of money to attack the protestors. The regime tried to distance itself from the thugs by claiming that they were loyalists who were supporting Mubarak’s rule. When it became evident that the regime’s hands were soaked in blood, people were provoked. There was no room left for justification. Furthermore, the thugs could not sustain their attack when they themselves had to pay the price.
Also, it became too expensive for the regime and some of its supporters from the velvet class to fund 25,000 thugs. And so, they vanished.
Tactique clé
Occupying Tahrir Square was a geographically and politically strategic move. The square is located in the geographical centre of Cairo and is a focal entry and exit point. It disrupted business-as-usual not only for local shops and vendors, but also tourism, one of Egypt’s main sources of income. Politically, having millions of people united under one demand was unprecedented for Egypt, and having them all gathered in the square showcased their numerical strength. Thus, the occupation of the square exceeded the threshold of acceptable risk for the regime. For 18 days, Tahrir Square became home to many protesters. Tents were erected, controlled points of entry were created, and revolutionary music concerts were held. What helped make this tactic sustainable was the generosity of the people living around the square, who opened their houses for protesters to wash, eat, and rest.
Principe clé
During the first week of the revolution, there was no indication that the regime was willing to heed the demands of the people. Many of us felt that the sleepless nights we were spending in Tahrir Square were a waste of time and should come to an end. But the Battle of the Camel changed our mood, as well as the mood of the entire country. The Egyptian people’s response to the battle took the regime by surprise; it was clear they were reacting to the situation rather than containing it. The only interpretation was that the regime had run out of options and was effectively in a fight-or-flight mode. Now we knew: The harder we fought, the closer Mubarak was to fleeing.
Méthodologie clé
The Battle of the Camel truly shifted the spectrum of allies and moved many of those who were on the fence (both inactive supporters and neutral people) to actually join the revolution. And this made all the difference. For the first week, tens of thousands of Egyptians were merely observers of the revolution. They preferred going about their daily lives without disruptions or were too comfortable behind the screen watching history. However, when protesters capitalized on the incident of the Battle of the Camel, and spoke to people’s hearts and minds by exposing and highlighting the brutality of the regime, the people who had previously been inactive and neutral suddenly felt they had something bigger to lose. Quickly, people of different classes, ideologies, and backgrounds took to the streets and joined the revolution.