Wyclef Jean’s contribution to the Egyptian revolution

Is the Haitian rapper the real reason behind Mubarak’s exit?

The Egyptian people triumphed today – but not without a little help from the former Fugees rapper and erstwhile Haitian presidential candidate, Wyclef Jean.

The rapper uploaded his song " 'Freedom' (Song for Egypt)" on to YouTube this morning. This afternoon, Hosni Mubarak stepped down. Coincidence?

After being barred from running for president of Haiti in 2010 because he was not a resident there, perhaps Jean will consider running to become president of his Egyptian "sisters and brothers".

From "La Marseillaise" to Bob Dylan's "Blowin' in the Wind", songs have the power to inspire protesters. Let's wait and see if the latest offering from Jean, a self-styled Bob Marley for the YouTube generation, will become the soundtrack to this revolution.

In the song, he sings of "the scars of courage" on the faces of his "sisters and brothers", and draws on Egypt's history:

If the pyramids could talk they probably would say we want freedom,
Cairo wants freedom, the youth want their freedom, they want a peaceful solution.
I see the camels in the desert,
But they don't have no riders . . .

He assures the Egyptian people:

Allah has not forgotten you, he is grateful.

Jean is no stranger to mixing politics and music. He has likened himself to the Haitian revolutionary Touissant l'Ouverture, saying, "Revolution is in my bloodline." When protest broke out in Egypt he changed his picture on Twitter to an Egyptian flag. Clearly, Mubarak was able to withstand the protests of thousands of his fellow Egyptians – but Wyclef's video proved too much . . .

Over in Tunisia, the rapper Hamada Ben-Amor released a song protesting at the rule of the then president, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. The video became a YouTube sensation as protests continued in the country. The 22-year-old was subsequently arrested, and the authorities refuse to comment on the situation.

If this has whetted your appetite for music that champions a cause, check out the New Statesman's top 20 political songs. For a slightly more serious analysis of Mubarak's exit, go here.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either

The question of "who knew what, and when?" shouldn't stop with the Conservative peer.

If Grant Shapps’ enforced resignation as a minister was intended to draw a line under the Mark Clarke affair, it has had the reverse effect. Attention is now shifting to Lord Feldman, who was joint chair during Shapps’  tenure at the top of CCHQ.  It is not just the allegations of sexual harrassment, bullying, and extortion against Mark Clarke, but the question of who knew what, and when.

Although Shapps’ resignation letter says that “the buck” stops with him, his allies are privately furious at his de facto sacking, and they are pointing the finger at Feldman. They point out that not only was Feldman the senior partner on paper, but when the rewards for the unexpected election victory were handed out, it was Feldman who was held up as the key man, while Shapps was given what they see as a relatively lowly position in the Department for International Development.  Yet Feldman is still in post while Shapps was effectively forced out by David Cameron. Once again, says one, “the PM’s mates are protected, the rest of us shafted”.

As Simon Walters reports in this morning’s Mail on Sunday, the focus is turning onto Feldman, while Paul Goodman, the editor of the influential grassroots website ConservativeHome has piled further pressure on the peer by calling for him to go.

But even Feldman’s resignation is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Although the scope of the allegations against Clarke were unknown to many, questions about his behaviour were widespread, and fears about the conduct of elections in the party’s youth wing are also longstanding. Shortly after the 2010 election, Conservative student activists told me they’d cheered when Sadiq Khan defeated Clarke in Tooting, while a group of Conservative staffers were said to be part of the “Six per cent club” – they wanted a swing big enough for a Tory majority, but too small for Clarke to win his seat. The viciousness of Conservative Future’s internal elections is sufficiently well-known, meanwhile, to be a repeated refrain among defenders of the notoriously opaque democratic process in Labour Students, with supporters of a one member one vote system asked if they would risk elections as vicious as those in their Tory equivalent.

Just as it seems unlikely that Feldman remained ignorant of allegations against Clarke if Shapps knew, it feels untenable to argue that Clarke’s defeat could be cheered by both student Conservatives and Tory staffers and the unpleasantness of the party’s internal election sufficiently well-known by its opponents, without coming across the desk of Conservative politicians above even the chair of CCHQ’s paygrade.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.