Sadat's legacy of peace and conflict

Sadat's legacy of peace and conflict

By Magdi Abdelhadi
Arab affairs analyst, BBC News




Sadat was the first Arab leader to recognise the state of Israel

Exactly 25 years ago a group of young soldiers broke away from a military parade in Cairo.
They opened fire on the podium where President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, flanked by his top brass and foreign dignitaries, sat watching the annual commemoration of the most important event in his political career.
Sadat was assassinated while marking 6 October - the day the Egyptian army stunned the world in 1973 by launching an audaciously successful crossing of the Suez Canal, destroying Israeli fortifications and recapturing the eastern bank of the waterway.
It was the war that brought him glory at home. But it also carried the seeds of his downfall eight years later.
The war eventually led to Israel withdrawing from the Sinai desert, which it had captured in 1967. But this came at a heavy price.
Against much opposition, Sadat concluded a peace deal with Israel, which included official recognition of the Jewish state.
That brought him many enemies in Egypt and the wider Arab world.
Recognition and contempt
Although the October war is viewed in Egypt as a great triumph, the recognition of Israel remains to this day a controversial and highly emotive topic.
Calls to expel the Israeli ambassador to Egypt or tear up the peace treaty are not difficult to find, particularly at moments of heightened tension, like now between Israel and the Palestinians, or during Israel's war recent against Hezbollah.
Sadat's Islamist assassins were his erstwhile allies against the left

The peace with Israel gained Sadat international respect and eventually the Nobel Peace Prize (together with Israeli Prime Minister Menachim Begin), but it alienated many at home and in the region.
Like much else in Arab politics, those who oppose the US and Israel are regarded as heroes, those who court them are villains. Sadat belonged to the latter category.
The peace he concluded with Israel remains a largely cold one because of the visceral hatred many feel in Egypt towards Israel, and the firm and widely held belief that the Jewish state was created on land the Zionists had stolen from the Palestinians.
Continued occupation of Gaza and the West Bank reinforces the deeply rooted hostility.
However, some people feel that history has vindicated Sadat's approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Just over a decade after his assassination, the Palestinians embarked on their long and arduous path of peace-making with their enemies, and the Jordanians followed suit by concluding peace with Israel.
Sadat had promised the Egyptians that peace with Israel would attract foreign investment and bring prosperity. It didn't.
The country's economic woes continued to accumulate, the gaps between the poor and the rich got bigger, and Sadat grew more and more intolerant of his critics.
Shortly before his assassination, he had thrown in jail his opponents from all political walks of life - left, right and centre.
But the political and economic reforms Sadat had initiated - steering Egypt away from the command economy and the one-party state he inherited from his predecessor, Gamal Abdul Nasser - have continued to shape Egyptian society.
Islamists wooed
Another enduring legacy of Sadat was the return of militant Islam.
Sadat had no power base when he succeeded Nasser.
Sadat steered Egypt away from Nasser's one-party state

To crush his opponents - most of whom were secular and leftist forces - he wooed the Islamists and sought their support.
Unlike his predecessor, he allowed them to campaign freely in society.
He amended the constitution making Islamic Sharia the main source of legislation.
Like other regional and international players during the cold war, Sadat used political Islam to strike at opponents he branded as "communists".
Once the genie was out of the bottle, it was difficult to put it back again.
Those who killed Sadat were his erstwhile allies in his battle against the left.
And they killed him because he concluded peace with their eternal enemy, Israel.
Among the many suspects jailed after the assassination of Sadat was a young Egyptian doctor by the name of Ayman al-Zawahiri. After serving his sentence, he left Egypt to join the swelling ranks of global jihad, and eventually became the chief ideologue of al-Qaeda.

Sadat nephew 'defamed Egypt army'

Mr Sadat is a controversial figure in Egyptian politics

A nephew of late President Anwar Sadat of Egypt is facing charges of defaming the army for suggesting its commanders may have been behind his assassination.
Talaat Sadat MP was stripped of his parliamentary immunity after making the remarks. He maintains he is innocent.
Leading Egyptian military and political figures were close to President Sadat when soldiers opened fire during a military parade in Cairo.
The attack happened on 6 October 1981, exactly 25 years ago.
The attackers were found to be members of an Islamic group angered by Sadat's peace deal with Israel.
BBC Arab Affairs analyst Magdi Abdelhadi says Talaat Sadat is a controversial politician who once threatened to hit parliamentary colleagues with his shoes - a particularly offensive form of aggression in Egypt.
He has accused a host of countries, including Israel, Syria and Iran, of complicity in the assassination of his uncle.
One particular claim has angered the military, our analyst says, that some army commanders might have been involved.
The top brass standing beside the president when the assassins opened fire included the current incumbent, Hosni Mubarak. Criticising the army in Egypt is not tolerated, our analyst says, let alone making such a serious allegation.

[sherifsalem]

Greatly missed in Egypt with all what is happening there now.........Still will always be remembered in history As the man of War and Peace!!!

[rafi]

Sadat was so before his time, it is sad. What a great man of guts, vision and conviction.

I remember his arrival in Tel Aviv, I still have all the newspapers from those days in my collection.

[grgnkat]

When I was in Egypt in 2009 I asked the tour guide what he thought of Sadat.

He said as far as he was concerned that he was a great man and he supported him and his vision.

[sherifsalem]

I agree Raffi.....he was an leader with vision and integrety not appreciated during that time!!!

I think the difference between Sadat and all other Arab Leaders back then was that he was SERIOUS about peace.

I have seen a couple of you tubes, Sadat with Golda and Begin i believe when he visited Israel with very interesting and funny dialogues...if i have a chance i will post them (as i cant post links before 15 posts)

But he understood what peace meant and set an example of peace which others followed.

My parents visited Israel i believe very early 80s after the peace accord back then tourism exchange had started as gestures of good will between both countries.

They came back amazed from the tour itself and with the hospitality.

[New Ron]

This is why they killed Sadat, because he unlike many leaders in the arab world said what ALL arab leaders knew to be true. That Israel is NOT a threat and that making peace with Israel would benefit all the region and would bring peace and prosperity to arab nations, of only because they wouldnt spend so much money on building armies to fight Israel.

Many arab leaders, were jealous of Sadat that he had the guts to say that in a post "hate Israel" generation.

However the radical islamists would have none of it and took him out, the truth is the taking down of Mubarak, while not all because of Israel, was in part because many Egyptians still havent understood that Israel is the way it is because so many of her neighbors have sworn to destroy it and have tried so many times!

The islamists have been the first to benefit from Mubaraks fall and anyone who denies need only watch the news and see who the democratically elected President of Egypt is at the moment.

[sherifsalem]

You have to look at the geopolitical framework during that time which Egypt was completely abandoned by most of the Arab Countries after the peace accords because in their opinion Egpyt went for peace all alone (which is not completely true)

therefore in order to come back to arms of the Arab World Sadat had to be dealt with, it was the only way for Egypt to be re integrated.

Sadat understood what is the price of war and peace. He paid the price of peace on the hands of islamic extremists, the so called moderates now are battling to cease power in Egypt and unfortunatelly they will.

I hope i dont see Egypt an Iran in the making in the next 20 years and that the moderate mainstrean Egypt would push these islamists out of the center political arena.

Easly said than done....

But make no mistake that the outcome of the new Egypt will be very important to the future of the Middle East in my opinion.


my two cents..

[AEWHistory]

Originally Posted by New Ron

This is why they killed Sadat, because he unlike many leaders in the arab world said what ALL arab leaders knew to be true. That Israel is NOT a threat and that making peace with Israel would benefit all the region and would bring peace and prosperity to arab nations, of only because they wouldnt spend so much money on building armies to fight Israel.

Many arab leaders, were jealous of Sadat that he had the guts to say that in a post "hate Israel" generation.

However the radical islamists would have none of it and took him out, the truth is the taking down of Mubarak, while not all because of Israel, was in part because many Egyptians still havent understood that Israel is the way it is because so many of her neighbors have sworn to destroy it and have tried so many times!

The islamists have been the first to benefit from Mubaraks fall and anyone who denies need only watch the news and see who the democratically elected President of Egypt is at the moment.

But this is what has happened to EVERY Arab leader (well, the ones of consequence and many of the lesser ones) who've had the guts to say these things. Look at the Hashemites: today they cling to their throne and have adopted the anti-Israel mantra, but sixty years ago they were possibly the most reasonable and accommodating force in the Arab world. Sadly the Arab/Muslim world is overrun with bigotry and backwardness to an immense degree today and this has swept away moderates in a very literal way. OTOH, I cringe whenever the arch-atheists get on their high horses and charge that it is "religion" that is the "evil" of the world, that Israel is just another religious state, etc. Theirs is just another type of ideology and an extreme one at that--it is ethical religion that has given us, well, the ethics and morality that atheism and modern paganism belittles. So we are stuck between religious extremism and backwardness on one hand and extreme anti-religiosity on the other--and hilariously the two have more in common than they dare admit as they try to sweep away the moderates around the world.....

I'm depressed now.... Gimme a beer.

[David of Galilee]

Sadat's vision was somewhat limited. Initiating the Yom Kippur War did cause us nearly 3000 dead and 10,000 wounded. For a little country, that was a big loss, all too help make Egypt appear to have regained face in the Arab world. I think that Jimmy Carter's major bribe of several billion dollars a year in military aide for the Egyptian armed forces maybe had some small role with encouraging Sadat to sign the peace treaty. That's a lot more than 30 pieces of silver for a poor coountry! He may have broken out of the pack of Israel's enemies, but he only did so in part, and at a price. All due credit for what he did that was good. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he took a somewhat more realistic look at the little Jewish nation. Yet I cannot say that it was worth the needless death of 3000 of my countrymen.

[Knaur]

Saddat was no angel, but he'll be judged in history by being compared to his contemporaries in that region, and in that, he ll be far from the worst.

[sherifsalem]

Everything has a price David, I dont beleive that Sadat is a Saint (He was the one to bring in the MB in the political arena in 70´ and we are paying now the price).
There was a price to pay unfortunatelly in Human life from both sides but when it comes to politics many variables come into play, i am sure the aid is something significantly important.

But you cannot take away his historical move with Begin which was unprecedented in that time and set an example of peace to the other Arab countries.

A cold Peace yes!!! but still holds until today therefore i believe it is the least o respect to the fallen.

[David of Galilee]

Originally Posted by sherifsalem

Everything has a price David, I dont beleive that Sadat is a Saint (He was the one to bring in the MB in the political arena in 70´ and we are paying now the price).
There was a price to pay unfortunatelly in Human life from both sides but when it comes to politics many variables come into play, i am sure the aid is something significantly important.

But you cannot take away his historical move with Begin which was unprecedented in that time and set an example of peace to the other Arab countries.

A cold Peace yes!!! but still holds until today therefore i believe it is the least o respect to the fallen.

I essentially agree with you. Sad that an even braver man could not have been. For all the Israeli dead, Sadat and Assad lost the ultimate battles militarily, and there were a lot more dead Arab sons than Jewish ones. I do not believe that God was pleased to see so many Arabs killed, either. Initiating bloodshed is a very poor choice for restoring national pride. But I will agree with you and others, that relative to other leaders, Sadat was an improvement, and a genuine thinker in some respects. I have read several biographies of Sadat, and am convinced he had a very fine intellect, and was a man who thought deeply about who his real enemies were.

[sherifsalem]

I utterly believe that Sadat capitilized politically much better than Assad on the initial military success of the October War something Assad failed to do both politically and militarly.

The limited war main intention was to change the Status Quo and gather international momentum to find whatever solution to gain back Sinai.

This situation could not go on eternally untouched which was the occupation of Sinai bloodshed was inevitable!!! Sad but true and God defenetly would not be happy, though both were praying for him to win!!!.

People tend to forget that from 1973 until 1979 Sinai was still occupied and Sadat had to act and convince Israel of credible Peace.

As he said in the opening speech in the knesset "no more war no more bloodshed"

[David of Galilee]

Originally Posted by sherifsalem

I utterly believe that Sadat capitilized politically much better than Assad on the initial military success of the October War something Assad failed to do both politically and militarly.

The limited war main intention was to change the Status Quo and gather international momentum to find whatever solution to gain back Sinai.

This situation could not go on eternally untouched which was the occupation of Sinai bloodshed was inevitable!!! Sad but true and God defenetly would not be happy, though both were praying for him to win!!!.

People tend to forget that from 1973 until 1979 Sinai was still occupied and Sadat had to act and convince Israel of credible Peace.

As he said in the opening speech in the knesset "no more war no more bloodshed"

National pride on the one hand, and national survival on the other, are incompatible motives. Because of that, in this world the shedding of blood is inevitable.

Assad was a peculiar man, but being from an historically non-Muslim ethnic minority, which he forced the Muslim authorities to declare Sunni, he was perpetually wary. (Today the Alawi are probably so Sunnified as to be essentially orthodox Muslims, despite a very pagan origin.) Like Sadat, Assad was a man with a very good intellect. But unlike Sadat, Assad (in my opinion) preserved Alawis first, putting them in almost all key positions of power, and thus in some ways putting the rest of Syria second.

Egypt and Syria are so different. Both with strong pre-Arabic, pre-Islamic history and culture, but not much united by a common faith or language, even after 1500 years. Sadat was a great example of a modern man with traditional roots, but not a Westernized man--and that was good for the world to see. It is with some caution that I say, President Morsi could eventually be a big surprise. He is another educated man with an awareness of both east and west, with a US PhD. He could develop into a fine leader--but I have no chrystal ball here.

How is Sadat honoured in today's Egypt? Monuments? Do school children learn of him as a great leader? How to fit a man like that into the history of his own country.

[sherifsalem]

Sadat was able to provide concrete assurances for peace, something he was capable of delivering in exchange for peace.

But then, Sadat was a mature individual, guenuinely capable of seeing that there’s more than one side, and that people on the *other* side are also people.

In General Sadat is highly regarded in many circles in the Egyptian society clearly with different descriptions in each level ( Man of War and Peace) , (Traitor - with extremists)ect...

No monuments that i know of, i think the most significant place would be his grave near to where he was assasinated!!

My pesonal opinion the more time will pass the more people will understand how visionary Sadat was for that time and how he opened Egypt politically and economically to the world, at some point of time he must have decided to put Egypt as his first priority and that was felt untill today by Egyptians.....

As you sad :
Sadat was a great example of a modern man with traditional roots, but not a Westernized man--and that was good for the world to see.

It is nice to have this civilized discussion David

[ishmael]

Following Dovid and Sherif in conversation. I remember something my father told me. Those who have suffered in a war, have lost loves ones and have felt the pain of sacrfiices hate war. Those who watch from a seat scream loudest for it.

[sherifsalem]

I dont see nobody screaming for war here....maybe the fact is that being from another generation that does not support war you see things differently which in no circumstances minimize the values and sacrifies of the ones who did live it.

That´s all

Che

[David of Galilee]

Maybe Anwar Sadat really understood what Golda Me'ir said to him, "We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours."

Killing, even in self-defense, changes a man, and no one ought to have to do that.

[ishmael]

Che, i think either my English or your understanding of it was off. I admired you, not saying you scream for war.