Egypt at Cross-Roads

John Samuel

At the heart of Cairo, Tahrir square- the square of Liberation, is surrounded by very important institutions of power and culture. The square was named after the Liberation, in 1952, from the rule of a corrupt and feeble Monarchy. A group of young military officers forced out the monarchy, a puppet regime of the British colonialists. And in 2011, hundreds of thousands of largely middle class people, particularly young, want an aging Hosni Mubarak to leave the chair- for the people. Hosni Mubarak ruled Egypt more than anyone since Muhammad Ali in the early nineteenth (from 1805) century.

Over a period of thirty years, the regime systematically subverted, marginalised or annihilated any voice of dissent or opposition or democratic freedom. Though in 2005, under the pressure from the US, Hosni Mubarak sought to create a smoke screen of 'democratic' election, it did not help the eroding legitimacy of the regime. The rise of a corrupt network of rich people around the regime and the efforts to install his younger son, Gamel Mubarak, as the next ruler further alienated a large number of urban middle class across Egypt.

The growing social and economic inequality, along with increasing price of essential commodities and decreasing employment opportunities provided the trigger for expressing the widespread discontent brewing over many years. The popular uprising against another long-ruling dictator in the Arab World provided new inspiration for the younger generation. Al-Jazeera televised the 'Revolution' in Tunis. This inspired imagination of the young and found the expression of anger, pent-up over the years. This was the first time a majority of them ever participated in a protest movement. The loose social network of young people on Face book to commemorate Khaled Said, a young man allegedly beaten to death by the Police, gave a call for a protest on 25th January (Police Day), to highlight the brutality of the Police. Those in the April 6th network and few from the Ghad( Tomorrow) Party of former Presidential candidate Ayman Nour supported the call for a protest mobilisation on 25th January They expected few hundred; but thousands of people wanted to chant Liberation at the good old Liberation Square. That is how the popular urge for a revolution began!

It is important to understand the present social and political mobilisation in the context of the history, geo-politics and the larger international politics.

Understanding the political history of Egypt

Egypt is not simply another country. Egypt is the only trans-continental nation-state with an influence in Africa, Mediterranean region, Arab world and within the larger framework of Pan-Islamic world. Egypt- with a written history of more than six thousand years, still remain the most eloquent symbol of the March of history and power in the entire history of the world. One of the first unified Kingdoms in the world was founded in the region in BCE 3150 by King Menes, followed by a series of dynasties of Pharaohs. Some of the most evident form of the expression of power, in the form of Pyramids, followed by the development of Alexandria as one of the most important centres of trade, culture and civilizations, during the Roman Era created an enduring and entrenched sense of hegemonic role for the country. Egypt has influenced Europe, Asia and Africa in so many ways all through the history. Christianity was introduced in Egypt by St. Mark, the disciple of Jesus and the Coptic Church of Egypt still remains one of the ancient churches in the world. The journey of Egypt through the Roman Empire, Byzantium, absorption in to the emerging Islamic empire in CE 639, and annexation to Ottoman empire 1571 and the emergence of new monarchy under Mohammed Ali in 1805 and the eventual over throw of the monarchy of King Farouk in 1952 by Free Officers Movement, led by a group of Army officers give us broad sense about the complexity of the political trajectory of the country.


It is with the French invasion by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1789, Egypt began to face the colonial and imperialistic powers of the west, in the form of French and then the British domination. During the Ottoman campaign against the French in 1801, Muhammad Ali, an Albanian general in the Ottoman Army took over the control of Egypt. The real interest of the colonial powers in Egypt began when the Suez Canal was completed in 1869, in partnership with the French. The Suez Canal completed during the tenure of King Islamil had immense political consequences. The heavy cost of construction of the canal left Egypt with a huge debt to the European Banks. And to pay back the Debt, the people were over taxed and this created new political tensions. Making use of this opportunity, the British took over the canal and converted the monarchy in to a puppet regime and eventually making Egypt a British Protectorate in 1914.

The first political mobilisation against foreign intruders and monarchy and the seeds of the first nationalist movement found expression in the people’s upraising in 1879, led by Ahmed Rabbi. This led to the first nationalist ministry, with a commitment to democratic reforms and parliament’s control over the budget. Fearing the rise of democratic movement, the British and French mounted an attack against the government and reinstated Ismael’s son Tawfiq as the figure head of regime, effectively controlled by the British.

The beginning of the Islamist and Arab nationalist movement against western imperialism and the British colonialism emerged in the later part of 19th century. Al-Azhar University became a fountain head of the political and knowledge process in the region. It is in such a context that the Pan-Islamic movement against western imperialism, propagated by Jamalluddin Afghani found many followers in Egypt. Jamalluddin Afghani was a scholar, activist, religious reformer and campaigner – who significantly influenced the Islamic discourse in the British India, Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt Russia, and within the Ottoman Empire. The ideological work of Jamalluddin helped to create a pan-Isamist critique against imperialism and colonialism. The founder of Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al Banna, was a follower of the pan-Islamist ideology propagated by Jammalludin Afghani.

Muslim Brotherhood began as social-religious reform movement in 1928 attracted the attention of an emerging educated middle class wish a share sense of discontent against the British Imperialism in the Arab Region- particularly in the context of the geo-politics of the oil. So the organisation emerged as the most entrenched form of socio-religious force - with a hundred years of legacy of Islamist critique of Imperialism. The ideology of Muslim Brotherhood has very significantly influenced the Islamist politics in the Arab world, South Asia and elsewhere. Though, many of the more militant version of the pan-Islamist movements, including Hamas and Al-Qaida, emerged through the political trajectory of the Muslim Brotherhood, it is more of socio-religious transnational organisations, rather than a political party. And

Muslim Brotherhood itself is no longer a monolithic organisation. It is more of a networked organisational form- with extreme fundamentalists to moderate and liberal Muslims within its fold.
Muslim Brotherhood, though officially banned, in Egypt has formally declared its stand against violence. In spite of the official ban, Muslim Brotherhood still remains the most organised social, religious and political force in Egypt. However, one also has to understand that in a country of around 83 million people, Muslim Brotherhood is estimated to have only around one hundred thousand active members and another hundred thousand supporters working through a network of mosques, clinics and Charity organisations.

Egypt has been the fountain head of new thinking, knowledge formations and new waves of Islamist politics. One of the key issues in Egypt and the Arab world is still the Palestinian issue. There were four wars between Israel and Egypt. In spite of a widely shared sense of discontent against Israel in the Arab world, Egypt signed a peace accord, after Camp David Treat in 1979, with Israel and established diplomatic relationship with Israel. The peace-treaty was more between the two regimes, and less between two people. Hence, there is a wide-spread discontent against the perceived hegemony of the USA and Israel in the geo-politics of the region.

Movement for Democracy

Today, Egypt is at the heart of the Arab World- a country with immense geo-political and economic implications. The people of Egypt have not only a collective memory of civilization depth - but also a vibrant legacy of influencing the knowledge and political process of the region. Every time when I visit Egypt I was struck by this shared sense of collective memory about a culture and civilization- much beyond the usual confines of religion.


So the present people’s campaign against the regime of Hosni Mubarak needs to be seen in the larger historical, political and ideological context of Egypt and the Arab region. A network of progressive civil society organisations and NGOs played a key role in enabling invisible modes of mobilisation - for months on this- much before what have witnessed from January 20th. As someone who knows many of these actors on the ground I could see this coming.
The present mobilisation and protest is due to number of cumulative process- and in such a process there are a whole range of actors across and beyond various ideological shades. So if someone wants to discover a 'left' or 'Marxist' revolution, they are simply doing a wishful reading, far away from the real political dynamics on the ground. And the present mobilisations have direct link with a) Large number of unemployment b) Rampant corruption and a completely corrupt and cynical police force c) Crony capitalism and high level of social and economic inequality d) Sky rocketing price of essential commodities e) Use of the state force to silence the critics f) range of political process- largely Islamist critique- and shared sense of anger against US f) The impact of new media and the 'revolution' in Tunisia, g) A widely shared sense of anger about the perception that Hosni Mubarak is more of representative of American interests in the region h) The real pressure of economic crises felt by so many poor people due to the sky rocketing price of essential commodities This was partly a 'reaction'- and also partly opportunistic- as the election in Egypt is scheduled to be held in September and no one wants to have the son of Hosni Mubarak as the candidate of the 'one and only'- the National Democratic Party. The immediate triggers for these protests are a) High level of unemployment among educated middle class youth and b) High prevalence of corruption and complete erosion of the legitimacy of the government. A whole range of actors from Human rights activists, socialists, Islamists, professionals and members of Muslim Brotherhood are involved in the present campaign. In fact, many of the young people at the forefront of this campaign also happened to be educated middle class, with a neo-liberal inclination. So any effort to theorise the mobilisation of diverse interests and ideological spectrum in to a particular framework would be problematic.

Implications of Political Transitions
Following are some of the key implications of the ongoing political mobilisation and movement in Egypt.

1) Health of political parties is very important for the sustenance of any democratic system. And Hosni Mubarak over a period slow-poisoned co-opted and annihilated the multi-party system. When there is no-vibrant political party system, there is an increasing chance of any big mobilisation or protest get subverted and instrumentalised by other streams of vested-interests and reactionary forces. When there are a significant number of people without any stake in the country and the government they live, there will be cumulative discontent bursting in to forms of mobilisation and violence.

2) Egypt, Syria and Iran are the most strategic countries in the region- as all these people carry a collective sense of history and memory with a shared sense of immense pride. And these counties also got what can be termed as 'civilizational depth'. So a wind of change in Egypt can have immense consequence for the region. And while many of these countries may move to a different pattern of relatively more democratic regimes, the chances of them adhering to the received notions of 'western liberalism' is less. And one has to understand this beyond the confines of religion to a more cultural and civilizational assertions of these countries.

3) This could create new insecurity in Israel and this means a more aggressive posturing by Israel with possibly new alliances and Axis within the Arab world.

4) If the trouble continues in Egypt- and its potential spread to other countries, the price of crude oil and petrol may sky rocket( as it happened in 1973 and 77)- and this would have clear implications for the economy of Europe and then many oil importing countries across the world. Europe is going through a very vulnerable period of economic and political phase. And an increasing price of oil means a further hike in food price and also other commodities. This could create socio-political tensions in many countries of the world.

5) It would be good to study the modes of de-colonisation and 'modernisation' project in many parts of Arab world, Africa and Asia. Wherever, the process of decolonisation happened through the army elites- or a 'movement' led by army officers, democracy did not take root. If we study the history of Egypt from 1950s to 2010- one can see how this process unfolded- from Nasser- through Sadat- and Hosni Mubarak. If we look at the history of Turkey, Indonesia etc, we get this picture. And note that all of them have been countries with majority of Muslim population. The dynamics and process of decolonisation and the post-colonial regime- and the implications of such a process- need a closer look.


6) So the chances are that USA and its allies would try to influence the army (which received annually an average of 2 billion US dollars as military aid from the US- one of the biggest recipient of US military aid for thirty years). In the post-Islamic revolution in Iran in 1977, US co-opted Hosni Mubarak as an effective 'neutralising' agent in the region. Egypt and Jordan were the key blocks in the middle-east strategy of the US- in relation to Israel and Iran. And now such a 'constructed' consensus of 'false stability' may give rise to new geo-political equations and consequent tensions in the region. Hence, the US- and its allies would try to pop-up a national government with the support of army- and a secret pact with Muslim Brotherhood. And eventually after an election within the next six months, they will try and co-opt a new government. However, this will not be that easy- as there is a widely shared anti-American sentiment across the region. And Egypt has longer history of ant-imperialist politics- based on an Islamist critique of imperialism and western liberalism.

7) It is after the Iranian Islamic revolution against the regime of Sha (where America completely lost the plot and the people), that Egypt acquired a new 'strategic significance'. The biggest recipient of the US Military aid has been Israel. Then Egypt and the third one is Pakistan. Egyptian Military received one of the highest military aid and training from the USA. The regime of Hosni Mubarak (along with Jordan) was a key part in the US-game-plan of the Regan Era and this continued. And one of the reasons that US got hardly any supporters in the entire region is the 'double speak' on democracy- and a complete cynical approach of using authoritarian rulers- in the name of the MB- and other such forces. And at the same time the Regan- Sia-ul-huq dispensation funded the extreme Islmist Taliban and Mujahidin. And also those who are educated and aware could clearly see through this double speak- when the real interest was in oil and to create - adequate tension- to do geo-political balance through supporting Israel- and at the same time taking peace! All these led to a middle class - more educated and aware - angry with this dispensation of Mubarak- US axis.

8)During the Nasser phase, Egypt was more inclined to the soviet- side- and it is during that phase that there was a significant wave of left thinking and trade unionism in Egypt. However, that generation began to get eclipsed in the 1990s- and many of the erstwhile leftist (particularly many Trotskyites) moved to a pan-Islamic framework of critique of the western civilization-imperialist mode. So what can be termed as left in the context of Egypt are largely the academic variety and mostly those human rights civil society groups and NGO. These networks played a role in the sense of consistently critiquing the Mubarak- American axis that suppressed the democratic political aspirations and process. However, the present mobilisation is a result of number of factors- and got a whole range of actors involved in it- due to different reasons.


The Emerging challenges

Every political situation, context and revolution would be unique. That goes without saying. But no political transition in the modern nation--state happens in isolation. There are historical, economic, cultural, geo-political and international dynamics that influence and shape the agenda of any regime or change of regime. While understanding and appreciating the power of the people and the unique character of the situation, it is also important to be informed by soco-cultural and political history of the region and the world- and also develop a sense about comparative politics- in any types of transitional politics.



1)Military still remains one of the most stable and strong institutions in Egypt- and the entire political leadership of Egypt from 1952 were derived from the military. And the top brass of Military will certainly have role in negotiating change- in the next one year- and even when there is a civilian government, their role will not decrease

Most of the top brass of army are trained by the US (like the case of Pakistan) and hence the US plan would be to operate through the Army (that is what they did from 1977 to 1982- till Mubarak was in the chair- he was from Air force) - and pop up a national unity government- with possible participation of a section of MB. The present NDP may split in to two or three factions. In spite of all the present enthusiasm and mobilisation, in the next election in September, there could be political subversion - and the chances of an ex-military man in the form of party A or B would be more probable.

Army is not monolithic. It is one thing for the soldiers or policemen to be friendly with people, but it is an entirely different thing when it comes to hard power politics of managing multiple interests with the muscle power of army. One has seen this in many places, most recently in Thailand. So there may not be any sudden repression or oppression. But what may happen is the ‘subversion’ of power in such transition

Armed forces may not want to lose this opportunity to control and the US may not want to miss the opportunity to influence the army. So it could even be like a Pakistan-type arrangement. Civil Government n the front- with army in the back with huge say in foreign policy, security and defence. The problem is that 'built-in' instability may cripple the Egyptian economy- and the extremist elements would take this opportunity to create more sense of insecurity and chaos

2) As Egypt moves in to next phase, there are many challenges ahead: a) The future of the 1979 , Israel-Egypt accord signed after the Camp David b) How new political parties get a real presence and politics within a period of six months- in a society that hardly got any political party process, structures or experience c) How to transform institutions in such a way to align to the new aspiration for a democratic civilian governance d) Ability to do strategic negotiation with Military to make sure that they remain in the background of the political process rather than in the forefront e) Supporting the new political party process to move towards a more democratic and peaceful transition. Egypt may also require a new constitution- and this would take its own time- with lots of political implications. The next one year may define the politics of the country and region in the next fifteen years.

There are many issues here: a) Absence of rooted leadership with political experience or understanding- as Mubarak destroyed all possibilities for alternative politics or leadership b) whether the Barak Obama would show a sharp sense of practical as well as political imagination that would help that US to win back the good will of the people, and at the same time ensuring the sustainability of the Egypt-Israel peace accord. Egypt is a geo-political hot-spot for various reasons- and in a way the US simply cannot afford to lose the precarious (and risky) geo-political balance within the given context.

3)The more challenging aspect would be how to transform the energy of young people who in a way spontaneously mobilised and persisted for change to be a part of the new political process and positive development. Most of them want a peaceful co-existence with Israel. While a large number of them may prefer a moderate Islamic slant of democratic governance, majority of people may not prefer the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood - as a large number of ordinary Egyptians also seem to indicate a respect for other religions- particularly the Coptic Church- as almost 10 percent of population may be Christians

4)There has to be new constitution, election and a civilian leadership.In the last many years, there were hardly any genuine elections in Egypt. And conducting an election is not merely about aspirations- but also about institutional capacity and technical capacity. The logistics, capacity and the technical know-how of conducting a genuine election requires institutional experience and technical expertise as well.

5)One has to wait and see how the 'Revolution' unfolds in terms of hard-politics in terms of negotiating multiple interests and ideals for democracy. Of course, we all would like a true revolution- with transformative politics, policy and state. But that is not something that can happen within few months

6)History of stable democratic transition shows the need for three things( among others) a) Healthy political party process b) Army completely detached from political management of the state, restricting their traditional role c) A capable and vibrant middle class. And Egypt certainly got a very capable, aware and enlightened middle class. And my sense is that after 58 years of direct role in political management of the state, it would be indeed challenging to keep out the army completely out of governance (particularly due to geo-politics and the entrenched power-relationships) and the sustainable political parties emerge over a period of time. So the chances are there will indeed be democratic transition with’d’ in the short term.

7) In the present context of transition,it may be good to learn from experience of Turkey- (which in a way had close links with Egypt- historically and to somewhat culturally too- Egypt was a part of the Ottoman Empire and many institutions are influenced by such a historical experience). It is interesting to see how democracy- Islam- Army negotiated over a period of time in the context of Turkey- with a clear sense of negotiation with global and European economy. Of course, Kemal Ataturk was a true visionary- a man with a historical sense of mission, though he too began as young army officer( like Nasser)

8)The sheer power of mobilization of people and their aspiration for democracy means it would be difficult for the regime to continue in the present mode. So in the emerging situation, there will be more space and freedom for people, space for political parties, but a transition to a restricted democracy- with a civilian leadership- backed by the Army.

It is one thing to transition to a civil leadership and it is not the same thing to sustain a stable and vibrant democratic state. One hopes this will happen and this would go down in the history as the one of the most formidable democratic revolutions in 21st century. One can hope so, though hope in itself may not necessarily match with the complexities of power-games on the ground and elsewhere.


The next few weeks in Egypt will have serious implications not only for the region, but also for the economy and political process of the world.