Monday, September 16, 2013

Regarding the Military’s loyalty Oath

I do not think that it is too late to discuss this matter that made controversy and headlines all over the world.
Interim President Adly Mansour issued a presidential decree late last August to remove a very interesting part from the armed forces’ oath of loyalty.
That part concerning the allegiance to the President of republic does not exist anymore. That part was “to be loyal to the president of the republic.”
I was surprised when I had heard the news. Of course all the world consider that move was another example on how the Egyptian armed forces will not obey any civilian president enforcing the military state and political power in Egypt.
Still no one had paid attention to the  history of the armed forces’ oath of loyalty  before.
It turned out that the original military loyalty oath had not had this part before ousted Hosni Mubarak. Yes it turned out that Mubarak added this phrase to the loyalty oath. Some say that Mubarak added to the oath after getting rid from his rival defense minister Abu Ghazla.
As you may know Abdel Halim Abu Ghazla was popular not only among the army but also by the public and Mubarak got rid of him in a big for fear that he would lead a coup against him. “Of course some say that Program T was behind his dismissal”
The oath continued after the 25 January 2011 revolution and of course Muslim Brotherhood’s Morsi would not think to change it.
Well ironically the army turned against Mubarak and Morsi whom the officers swore loyalty to it !!
Now the current oath is as follows :
“I swear to God to be a loyal soldier to the Republic of Egypt...protecting its security and peace...protecting and defending it on land, at sea or in air, inside and outside the republic...obeying military orders, implementing my leaders’ orders, protecting my weapon which i will not leave until death...God is witness to what I say.” 
Well I know that the Commander of Chief of the armed forces is the President thus the army should be loyal to him or “her… yes I am dreaming but it will not hurt ;)” according to military judiciary law of 1966.
The Pro-military supporters Of course say that it was a great decision because it liberated the army from loyalty to one person that is the president whom can be good or bad , fair or dictator to become fully loyal to the nation.
On the other hand I would say Pro-democracy and revolutionaries are concerned from that change saying that it would enforce the state within the state notion.
Personally I believe that the oath does not matter as much because we got already a constitution that gave the army privileges more than any constitution in the history of Egypt. I do not think that the new amendments those articles about the army will be touched.
Nevertheless we have to think about the timing of the decision , why would an interim president or rather the army take it now ?? 
In the end that oath can be changed by the next president. Again Mubarak who added the president’s loyalty words ; was sold by the army during the January revolution.
People should realize that the constitution is the real deal here and it defines everything in the state including the relation between the president and the army. Of course SCAF got the upper hand in this relation thanks to Constitution 2012 especially if our next president will be a civilian.
Again the constitution is the thing that we should pay attention to now.
By the way I wish someone begins to discuss without fear the Civil-military relations especially in democratic transitions times in a simple way to the public in Egypt with all the challenges we got now. We need someone to discuss in Arabic too before English as it turned we got many articles and too many speakers about that topic in English but not in Arabic.


  1. Do you really believe that people uphold the words of an oath in Egypt?
    Hint: Doctors are supposed to follow the Hippocratic oath but doctors that are followers of the criminal el-ikhwan el-mugrimeen refused to treat those injured that are not ikhwangiyya

    1. You have a great talent of twisting anything and putting the blame on ikhwan for anything! Even for not treating injured-who-don't-even-exist!
      You should win Oscar of twisting!

    2. Clueless Yousf el-ikhwangee who is in love with el-ikhwan el-mugrimeen wrote

      >You have a great talent of twisting anything and putting the blame on ikhwan for anything!

      Then prove me wrong ya ayuha al-3abqari al-kabeer and why is that difficult? Let me guess because you cannot right?

      > Even for not treating injured-who-don't-even-exist!

      Really? the ikhwangiyya that happen to be doctors refused to treat non the non ikhwangiyya at Rabaa and how come you did not know that?
      Shame on them

      >You should win Oscar of twisting!

      I read this as you really have nothing to say and shame on you for defending terrorists

  2. Zenobia .. Interesting point, but in principle the oath is considered an irrevocable contract with God that cannot be changed (as opposed to the constitution).. moreover, The terms itself should not contradict with the Divine law .. I am not sure that taking an oath to blindly obey the president or head of the SCAF or whomever is in line with the divine law !!


Thank You for your comment
Please keep it civilized here, racist and hateful comments are not accepted
The Comments in this blog with exclusion of the blog's owner does not represent the views of the blog's owner.