Whoever sows state terror, the terror organization reaps

In Egypt, in recent days, Amnesty International published a human rights report on the 100th day of Sisi's election as President. In the report it has identified, over these 100 days, a high rate of arbitrary arrests, the existence of systematic torture in prisons, and heavy pressure on freedom of the press, publication and thought.

When I first heard it, I said, thank God, the international organizations have not entirely forgotten the people of Egypt, so unlucky in the matter of just governments. But why was it the account of 100 days that was kept?

Sisi was elected President by himself, through a coup stratagem, a hundred days have passed, fine, but from the moment he carried out a coup on July 3, 2013, is he not responsible for everything that has taken place in Egypt? Has Sisi been governing Egypt only in the last hundred days? Is Amnesty naive itself, or does it take us for naive?

When you take as your baseline his election as President, which followed an election that played out like a complete comedy, you are, for one thing, taking this comedy seriously and legitimizing it too.

Yet he committed his first great crime by carrying out a coup against a legitimate government. On top of this crime, he slaughtered without blinking an eye, in a single day, in a square, three thousand of his own people who opposed it in the most rightful and most peaceful manner. That this massacre still does not concern Amnesty or anyone else is a great scandal in itself. Is Amnesty perhaps after pardoning Sisi and having him pardoned?

Today a series of cases has been opened against the former President on fabricated grounds, but not a single case has been opened regarding the killing of 3000 civilians during their unarmed and peaceful demonstration.

There are 3000 deaths that took place within a single day, and this does not even become the subject of a case, neither in Egypt nor in any other institution anywhere in the world. We have not heard that there is an investigation into it on Amnesty's agenda either.

Today in Egypt there is no politics, not the slightest respect for human rights, no freedom of thought, no opposition press. In return, there are death sentences handed out with ease, hundreds of people at a time in a single session, for fabricated crimes, in extremely casual trials heard in haste.

More than 40 thousand people are currently arbitrarily detained. Tens of thousands of others find the remedy in fleeing abroad because they are in opposition. There is no proportionate human rights sensitivity or democratic reaction toward Egypt, which, whichever way you look at it, has become an area of concentrated crimes against humanity.

Of course, the Islamist opposition in Egypt, which has had the political sphere completely closed to it and which, under unbelievable pressure, insists on remaining peaceful despite everything, surprises no one for some reason, but headlines titled "Islam and terror" are already prepared for the counter-violence that these conditions are sociologically expected to inevitably produce.

In Egypt the main squares, for example Tahrir and Rabia Square, are completely closed to demonstrators. The regime is not joking. They take down whoever approaches these squares. Despite this, every day the peripheral squares of Cairo and other cities continue to host demonstrations of tens of thousands of people that continue to remain peaceful.

These protests, which would normally have great news value, are of no concern to the world. The Brotherhood persists in remaining peaceful. Sisi and his supporters are trying to have the Brotherhood put on the list of terrorist organizations.

Meanwhile, young people and various groups, who see that these peaceful demonstrations in the squares are producing no result and whose rancor grows with each passing day, are beginning to think that the Brotherhood's peaceful method is invalid.

This treatment of the Brotherhood, which has shown a performance in remaining peaceful that would make one forget Gandhi, makes young people think that the path of democracy is closed and impossible, that democracy is in any case one big lie. A tendency toward more intense radicalization is being experienced with each passing day.

The voices coming from Egypt are not cheering. Those who organize mobilization in the name of fighting terror do not see that ISIS has become popular among young people because the political sphere in Egypt has been destroyed in this way under their own support or oversight. When they do see it, they are greatly astonished, and ask naively, "how can this be?"

Yet as we have said before, one who sows a coup in the Middle East reaps rage. One who sows dictatorship and the oppression of the mukhabarat reaps, in return, the consequences of illegal organizational actions. One who sows exclusion and discrimination reaps, in return, the revolt of peoples. One who sows state terror, who ignores that terror, who regards it as within the scope of the right of defense when the state commits terror, reaps a terrorist organization, reaps ISIS.

Those who truly want to understand ISIS and struggle against it should begin with this assessment.