Q: Do we understand from this that the rule should left for the corrupted and that politics should be separated from the Deen?? Should the righteous ruler step aside! This is the opinion of some salafists who think that the ruler should be irreligious because he will always be surrounded by a corrupted entourage and the that the clergy are nothing but apple polishers giving fatwa for the sake of the ruler’s interests.
A: Of course this is an unacceptable opinion. .It is not inevitable that the government must be corrupt and cannot pursue policies that conform to the religion and benefit the people. However, what is inevitable, particularly in the era of Mulk Jabryy, is that any government will be subject to tremendous pressure from external power, and must, therefore, plan and prepare for that reality.
At least one form of external pressure is simply the way the global power structure controls the parameters of policy discourse; what the IMF “recommends” must be best, and it is not open to debate. If any party enters office without their own independent understanding of economic issues, without a clear grasp on the actual predatory role of the IMF, foreign investors, and so on; without their own comprehensive plan for the economy; of course, they will fall into the trap, as the Ikhwan did.
An Islamist party will be, should be, must be, advocating radical restructuring of the economy, and it will be pitting itself against the global power structure. They will not be welcomed, will not be supported, will not find cooperation; they will not be given a place at the table of the global elites. So, they have to be prepared for that. A big part of preparing for that is to have a policy agenda that works, that brings real benefit to the people. This is why attempted coups in Venezuela and Ecuador failed; the population would not allow it.
The Muslim Brotherhood took the wisdom of neoliberalism as a given, even though they realized it would cause tremendous hardship for the people. They thought they could satisfy the global powers, and still be humane and decent, and take care of the population; but it is not feasible.
Mursi thought he could avoid cancelling bread subsidies, as the IMF demanded, by growing enough wheat to achieve self-sufficiency; but the IMF does not negotiate on its demands. That is why you should just never approach them.
The Ikhwan were accepting neoliberal reforms based on the assumption that they must be wise and good, because big important people call for them; but they began to see that these reforms would cause massive suffering. Instead of just rejecting neoliberalism outright, they tried to cooperate with the IMF demands while simultaneously trying to alleviate the suffering they would cause. That doesn’t work, and, because the Ikhwan entered office presuming that neoliberalism was good, they had no “Plan B”, and thus they had to improvise.
But, yes, as has been mentioned, the army was positioned from Day One to take over, as soon as they got permission to do so. That permission would have come the moment the Mursi administration showed any sign of reluctance to implement IMF dictates.
So, the point is, we have to develop our own economic program, our own policies, build support for those programs and policies, and go into the struggle knowing the global power structure will oppose us at every step. When you know you are going to be in a fight, you train for it.