Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate the situation in Egypt. As we know, on January 25 things changed in Egypt, and we are still trying to understand the effects of that change. Clearly, things are changing by the minute.
On January 24, President Mubarak was in charge of Egypt. On January 25, the people of Egypt were in charge of Egypt. That continues today to be the dynamic. It is the people of Egypt who are charting the course for the future of that country.
It is up to us, as those who support democratic aspirations, to be declarative that we support the people who have the courage and decided to overthrow a regime in a peaceful manner, a president who has been a tyrant for over 30 years. However, it is of concern that it is done in a way that represents the best interests of the people of Egypt, which is being seen today, and whether the rest of the world will support the intentions of the people who have decided they want to change the power structure within the country.
It is important that we be declarative, that we take a position. Our party at the outset was very clear. We said a number of things, which I will enumerate. We said that the election in November 2010 should clearly be re-run. We said that the emergency laws should be lifted. We said that it was important that all legitimate political parties be recognized and candidates for the presidential election in September be recognized as well. We also said that it was important that Canada take a position.
Sadly, at the time, we initially heard the government say that it wanted everyone to remain calm on both sides. Clearly, it was not in tune with what was going on because at that moment only one party was engaged in violence, which consisted of the security forces of Egypt that were using water cannons and tear gas against the population. Frankly, we all were concerned that might escalate.
It was a little tone deaf, frankly, when the government said that it wanted both sides to remain calm when only one side was using violent means. Thankfully, things did calm down. We saw the people amass in what is known now by everyone as Liberation Square. There was an acquiescence by security forces and the military did not intervene or instigate any form of intimidation against the people, notwithstanding that the regime was establishing curfew laws and edicts.
It is with hope and some concern that we watch what is happening. Developments in Egypt today have deepened our concern and the concerns for the safety of the protestors. Let us be clear. President Mubarak's insistence to delay his departure from power, as we heard last night, has contributed to further violence and destabilization, as we saw today. It is clear that for the sake of his country and regional stability, he must bow to the demands of the Egyptian people and immediately relinquish the position of president.
That is why we, unequivocally, condemn the use of violence against the peaceful and democratic demands of the Egyptian people. The alleged involvement of the regime in organizing the crackdown is completely unacceptable.
What do Egyptian protestors want? What do the people want? The clear consensus among all protestors is they want an end to Hosni Mubarak's regime. We have heard the calls for an end to corruption, an end to the emergency laws that have ruled Egypt for the past three decades. We have heard calls for economic fairness, representative and transparent governance and the protection of rights and freedoms. It is time for political reforms in Egypt and, as Egyptians have made clear, further delay is not acceptable.
It is with great pride that I note that not only were protests being organized in Cairo, but also right in Canada. I want to single out a couple of young Canadians who, like young Egyptians, organized demonstrations in the nation's capital last Friday and just yesterday in front of the Egyptian embassy. There were a number of them, but three people in particular were responsible in Ottawa. They are Iman Ibrahim, Mahmoud Al-Riffai and Yasmine Faoud. These three young people were like the young people in Egypt who decided they would put aside their affairs and would take the challenge to organize people to call for reforms for democracy in Egypt. We should applaud that.
It needs to be understood. This is not just about young people getting involved in politics. This is about young people leading a movement. If we did not have young people deciding that they have had enough, that they want to see real change, we would not see the changes we have seen.
Yes, technologies helped with this and it was important that there were tools like Facebook and Twitter. However, that is not the story. The story is that young people decided they would take on the powers that be and would decide the future of their country. They should be applauded, they should be lauded and they should not be treated in a paternalistic way. They should be respected for what they have done. They are a model of leadership, not just for Egyptians but for Canadians and others around the world.
That is important to understand because there has been a lot of talk about who is behind the protests.
However, I have had daily reports on the ground from Egypt and by all accounts the protestors are representative of every part of Egyptian society. They are truly Egyptian. There has been a breathtaking explosion of political and social creativity, organizational experiments and debates among ordinary people on how to organize their lives.
Some have worried that democracy in Egypt might embolden extremists. They point to the existence of the Muslim brotherhood as the strongest opposition in Egypt. This is false. The Muslim Brotherhood is not leading these protests and is hardly represented in them. In a population of 83 million, it hardly commands more than a few hundred thousand members. In fact, some have argued that fear of an extremist backlash, promoted by the current regime, was the rationale for their existence, and that was to distract others away from what the government was doing.
However, Egypt is an important player in the region and in the world. There is no question that we want stability in the region. However, the present situation under the current regime is neither stable nor sustainable. To fear these peaceful protests is an offence to the people who have put their lives on the line for their rights and freedoms. It is not representative and open governments that lead to extremism; it is the exact opposite.
Who are the political players? Who composes the Egyptian opposition? How are they preparing for the transition of power?
Despite the 30 years of crackdown, Egypt has a diverse political opposition composed of traditional parties and newer ones. While it is unclear exactly what will happen next, the information I have received from people on the ground is that opposition parties are talking. They are working together to find a consensus.
At one point they even put together what was called the people's parliament that formed a committee to negotiate certain terms. These parties have been united in the demand for Mr. Mubarak to depart.
However, these parties are not representative of everyone. One of the things that is being debated right now is the notion of who should be the interim. Many have pointed to those political players who do not have a vested political interest in the future presidency. I hope that is where things go but, of course, it will be up to the Egyptian people to decide that.
It is important to look at our role as an international community. We must not forget that we have played a role in Egypt in the last 30 years. This regime did not sustain itself on its own. It was supported by countries throughout the west. For decades we have stood by Egyptians and many of us have stood by those who have been denied rights, the basic legitimate rights of freedom of expression and of political participation.
In fact, it was the west that played a significant role in propping up this regime. It is really important that we understand that, not to shame anyone but to be held accountable. For instance, in 2008, the last time the government reported on Canada's weapon exports, Egypt was our 23rd largest client at $1.8 million. Some of the exports in arms to Egypt at that time included smoothbore weapons with calibres of 20 millimetres, automatic weapons with a calibre of 12.7 millimetres, unmanned airborne vehicles, aero engines and aircraft equipment.
We are part of this but compared to the U.S., we are minor players. However, it is important to note that we were responsible and we were implicated in supporting the regime.
What should Canada do now? What I have heard from many people on the ground, in general, and particularly from Egyptian Canadians, was that our government's response needed to be clearer, stronger and less tepid.
I recall a proud moment just a couple of years ago when the green movement of Iran rose up against the dictator in that country. I remember well that all parties in the House debated and passed a motion to support the green movement. We were pretty declarative in the House that we wanted to see its rights and voice recognized and to see the regime that was in place replaced.
I think we need to put that into context when we seem to be rather careful about what should happen with Mr. Mubarak. I think we should be clearer about what should happen with him, in that he should be asked to move on.
We should be demanding that our government intervene in a positive way, that we add our voice to others to condemn the use of violence against protestors and that we use all of our diplomatic influence on the Egyptian authorities to start moving forward to seek out an interim situation in terms of leadership that will then lead to elections and to the rebuilding of democratic institutions in Egypt.
It goes without saying that what we do and how we do it matters. What we have heard from young people in Canada and in Cairo, from people who have had their rights denied for over 30 years, is that they do not need one strong man to come in to lead them. They do not need the rest of the world to dictate terms to them.
What they need is to understand that the old way is the wrong way. The old way of deciding to support a strong man and ensuring that those people within our interest are supported is something we reject. The decision to do things differently means supporting a pluralistic approach to our foreign policy by supporting a pluralistic framework within other countries because this is happening elsewhere in the region. That would mean that our government would not need to hide from statements on where we stand.
In the next days and weeks that follow, we are not sure what will happen. Canadians want to know what the government's intentions are in terms of support for the future of Egypt. We not only hope that we will support Egyptians in deciding their own fate and future but also that we will stand with them, not only now, but after they have decided who should lead them. We hope not to turn our back on them. We hope that in the future we will reject the notion of supporting the strong man and support the pluralistic composition that is Egypt; that we are seeing in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and throughout Egypt today.
Finally, I hope that our Parliament, our government, will be stronger in how it decides to declare its support and that we should not hide from our pride in supporting the people of Egypt.
