Egypt: Hopes and Challenges

John Samuel

When people are together, they can indeed move mountains and shake the foundations of even the most formidable of the rulers. The Revolution that the world witnessed over the eighteen days at the Liberation square in the heart of Cairo proved the power of the people to challenge and change. This unprecedented people's revoultion for democracy in the Arabworld give a new sense of hope for democracy and people's aspirations for freedom. However, it also throws up new challnges as Egypt is moving towards a rather precarious political transition.
The next few months in Egypt will have serious implications not only for the region, but also for the economy and political process of the world

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.

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.


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

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

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.

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

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.

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)

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.


.