REVIEW BY W.J. RAYMENT

Mary Anne Weaver's book about modern Egypt and the militant Islamic movement is enlightening, thought provoking and just plain interesting. Although I am a trained historian I admit to having a hole in my education regarding Egypt. Sure, I learned all about the Pharaohs, Marc Antony and Cleopatra and even Napoleon's invasion, but none of this scattered knowledge prepared me for Ms. Weaver's book.

More than simply a colorful description (which it includes) "A Portrait of Egypt" is a deep analysis of the troubles plaguing the entire Muslim world. Through revealing interviews with prominent Egyptians Ms. Weaver peers into the heart of a conflict now raging between Egyptian secularists and Muslims. It is a struggle alien to Westerners, especially to Americans accustomed to melding cultures, for the prize desired by the Muslim insurgents is not merely power, but the ability to impose a fanatical brand of the Muslim faith on the entire nation.

Ms. Weaver believes that the Islamic movement is fueled by the economic disparity between the classes. In this she may be correct, in Egypt there is a huge underclass and worse yet a large, well-educated group of young men that has been radicalized. Many of these are unable to advance either economically or socially. She seems surprised that other young men with promising futures are also deeply involved in the movement. (Yet this is a phenomena well-known to sociologists and historians - see Guilt Blame and Politics by Allan Levite).

Though economics may be the fuel, the growing Islamic terror must have both an engine and a spark to move. The Islamic Jihad in Afghanistan, during the Soviet occupation was the engine. For Egypt provided some ten-thousand men to the struggle. They came home trained and energized. Yet they might not have moved against the present regime had not Anwar Sadat made peace with Isreal. This was the spark that set the Islamic terrorists in motion.

Even in the United States we have felt the sting of militant attacks. The World Trade Center bombing was perpetrated by such a group, targeting the US primarily because the government's perceived favorable treatment of Isreal and its unfavorable treatment of the Arab states in the region. Many more atrocities have been committed in Egypt itself from the murder or attempted murder of secular intellectuals to the slaying of tourists.

Yet this war is not a one sided affair. The Mubarek government has reason to blush at the behavior of its own police apparatus. Young men returning from the war in Afghanistan were arrested,tortured and perhaps executed in an effort to suppress the militants' ability to overthrow the current regime. This is not unlike what the Soviet Union did to its own troops returning from a victorious invasion of Germany after World War II. Even now accounts come out of Egypt that women and children are being tortured to "get to" their spouses, fathers and brothers.

The US currently helps prop up the Egyptian government with billions of dollars anually. I recently had a conversation with an economist who spent considerable time in the Middle East and he speculated that some of the charges of both sides might be exaggerated, although he was certain that attrocities were being perpetrated by both sides. When I questioned him as to why we should support such an undemocratic and repressive government he pointed out that we might as well support a government that would look after our interests in the region because whoever is in power (the Muslims, Mubarek or the Military) is going to be repressive.

A conversation with a friend from Pakistan was also revealing. He told me that in Iran the people were more or less tired of the restraints of the Islamic regime and there was a movement toward moderation there. He suggested that we let the whole region go to the militants - then support the other side. His advice sounds Machiavellian but not necessarilly practical or honorable.

Ms. Weaver assaults her subject with bravado, and in her interviews with Mubarek, Sheik Omar and other leading figures, she shows a degree of courage that deserts many of her contemporaries in similar circumstances. She always asks the hard question. Though she does not always get an answer, many of her subjects are candid and straight-forward. "A Portrait of Egypt" is eminently readable. Instead of treating the recent history of the region as a chronology, she treats it as an unfolding story and occasionally adds background. She seems quite perceptive about the interesting personalities she encounters (including even Anwar Sadat).

For all that this book reveals about Egypt and militant Islam, it makes no pretense about having definitive answers to the problems facing the Egyptian people. It may well be that the solution is enigmatic. Yet as a libertarian-conservative I can't help but propose that what is needed is an injection of freedom, freedom in the economy to bring up the standard of living of all Egyptians, freedom of speech by both sides of the issue, freedom of religion and the freedom to not participate in that same religion. Yet how this might come about is another question. It would require positive action by both sides of the fight. That seems highly unlikely at this juncture.

The contents of this article merely scratch the surface of the material contained in this book. "A Portrait of Egypt" is highly recommended.***

Purchase this book!