The Levant, in the broader sense that includes Egypt, is currently moving in several contradictory directions. From the moment that the cessation of hostilities went into effect in Gaza, "corpses" have dominated the headlines.
Counting, returning, and examining corpses, verifying the identities of the deceased, and removing them from under the rubble have all been receiving more attention and generating more commentary than the state of affairs in the Gaza Strip and the future of Israeli and Palestinian politics. This ubiquity of corpses, with their ample symbolism and connotations, all but defines the region, or at least a fundamental, grim, and tragic side of it.
The Gaza war that began with Hamas's operation on October 7 and culminated in Israel’s genocide was put an infatuation with corpses and overwhelming morbidity on display- a gruesome, immense spectacle that was aggravated by the absence of politics. It remains unclear whether the solutions fostered by foreign actors will find firm footing and consolidate in a battered Gaza. If politics is a preoccupation of the living, as well as a peaceful path to life- and since corpses, in contrast, indicate decay and the end- it would be fair to say that death’s victory over life could well be on the region’s agenda.
US Envoy Tom Barrack warned of another kind of death for Lebanon. It is true that many, in both the Arab world and in the United States and Europe, have been debating Barrack and his vague, contradictory, and bizarre statements, and they have questioned the extent to which these statements reflect US policy. Still, the current situation in Lebanon calls for taking his warnings, or at least some of them, seriously.
He has declared Lebanon a "failed state," casting doubt on the viability of the country, its frameworks, prospects, institutions, and policies. Making things worse, Barrack's statements coincided with Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz threatening to strike Beirut. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, very soon after, made statements to the same effect, albeit not with the same words.
As conditions of the Lebanese, who "await the strike" with dread amid a sense of total helplessness, as well as divisions typical of countries undergoing civil wars, these are not conditions that nations are envied for.
Nonetheless, we also find, on this region’s horizon, twists and shifts that some might see as a gateway to a different path, or at least a sign pointing to some kind of gateway.
The opening ceremony of the “Grand Egyptian Museum’’ a few days ago, which has drawn comparisons with the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, suggests that another trajectory for this region is possible.
Moreover, this part of the world has ancient history that can go toe to toe with the region’s political and military histories. In this way, the hard work of many, such as former Minister of Culture Farouk Hosny, can bear fruit, and some of the ideas championed by Egyptian icons, such as Ahmed Lutfi al-Sayyid, Taha Hussein, Tawfiq al-Hakim, Louis Awad, Fouad Zakaria, and others, can become reality to some degree.
Instead of reducing countries to battlefields, the new museum grants Egypt a bigger place in the world, and instead of imprisoning the people in a single, tiny box, we find ourselves facing a project that opens educational, investment, and tourism doors.
It is not insignificant, given our gloomy conditions, for ancient history to be presented as a means for bringing peoples and civilizations closer together, contrary to perceiving it as a field for war and hatred; nor was the emphasis on peace insignificant. If this emphasis did not stem from love for peace, then at the very least it signals recognition that wars are impossible and catastrophic. In this vein, Cairo welcomed its guests from across the globe with a brightly lit banner in English: "Welcome to the Land of Peace".
In a statement issued on the same occasion, the Al-Azhar Observatory for Combating Extremism explained that the opening of this edifice demonstrates that peace is the foundation of prosperity and stability, and that civilizations can only be built over safe ground that accommodates everyone. The new museum, this statement adds, is not merely a space where artifacts are exhibited, "but rather a renewed message Egypt is sending the world, affirming that protecting our collective heritage is part of the universal message of peace."
The fact is that it would be difficult to conceive of this development outside of a broader context: the decline of political Islam, not only as a fanatical and exclusionary militant movement, but also as an approach to history. History, in the view of Islamists, is not merely an open field for perpetual conflict; it is also a decapitated body, or a head severed from its body that suffices with a single civilization and identity, disregarding all others.
The new museum occupies a piece of land north of a genocide in Sudan and west of another genocide in Gaza. In this sense, it conveys humanistic and pluralistic openness, pushing back against political barbarization (a belligerent alternative to politics), and it signals the fact that it is possible to have a future different from both the past and the present.
As for political and artistic reservations, the price of entry and so on, these matters remain, in the face of this epic work, secondary details. Ultimately, if wars turn the living into corpses, then museums, in a sense, bring the dead back to life by extracting the life they had once been imbued with. This is especially true for a civilization like the great Pharaonic civilization.
