Egypt needs consensus. Not Revolutions Wednesday, 31 Jul 2013 at 08:44 PM Dr Akhtar Hussain WHEN Mohamed Morsi became Egypt’s first democratically elected president last year, it was an especially sweet victory for the Muslim Brotherhood, the region’s oldest and most influential Islamist movement. After a long history of repression, the Brotherhood had finally tasted triumph. But their short-lived rule ended soon last month when Egypt’s army deposed Morsi. One of the most important political developments of recent years was the decision of Islamist parties to have patience. Their time would come, the supporters were told. Now supporters of the Brotherhood will ask, with good reason, whether democracy still has anything to offer them. Morsi’s removal will breathe new life into the ideological claims of radicals. Al Qaeda and its followers have long argued that change can’t come through the democracy of “unbelievers”. As the Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri once said, “What is truly regrettable is the rallying of thousands of duped Muslim youth in voter queues before ballot boxes instead of lining them up to fight in the cause of Allah.” For the second time since 2011, vast numbers of Egyptians were demanding the resignation of their president. The Arab world’s most populous nation does need urgent consolidation, but it doesn’t need another revolution. Prior to this the country had already witnessed two major revolutions, one on July 23,1952, when “political vacuum” was abruptly filled by some young military officers, who called themselves ‘free officers’ and in the words of Anwar al-Sadat, “their main targets were the traditional trio-engaged in power struggle in Egypt, the British, the King and the feudalistic aristocracy”. Revolt on Nile. The military coup forced King Farook to leave the country on July 26, 1952. A Regency Council was established, General Mohamad Nagiub became commander-in-chief of Armed forces while Mohammad Ali was made Prime Minister. Again 2011 Revolution that toppled Morsi’s predecessor, former dictator Hosni Mubarak, was inspired by—in addition to police abuse and suffocating repression—the dire financial straits most Egyptians faced. Alongside Tahrir Square’s famous anti-Mubarak chants, protesters also rallied around a more basic slogan, in which the first demand went to the needs of the dinner table: “Bread, Freedom, and Social Justice.” After kings and military dictators, Mohamed Morsi was Egypt’s first democratically elected president. He prevailed at the polls a year ago by a very narrow margin, with almost 52 percent of the vote in a runoff. It had not been the happiest of choices. The young men and women of Tahrir Square who had brought down the old dictatorship felt disinherited; their revolution, they asserted, had been hijacked, but it was not an easy task for Morsi to pullout his country from the mess of economic disorder within this short span of time, when the West especially America was plotting otherwise . Morsi’s only significant success came early in his presidency, when he outmaneuvered the military and sidelined the institution as a force in civilian politics. This important achievement has now been undone when Morsi is ejected from power. Generals -- as Pakistanis, Turks and others will attest -- can inflict more damage to democratic and economic progress than an inexperienced civilian leader. They are also harder to remove. In 1954, a popularly backed Egyptian Army moved against the Muslim Brotherhood, arresting thousands and dismantling the organization. Prison had a radicalizing effect on Sayyid Qutb, a leading Brotherhood ideologue, who experienced torture at the hands of his captors before being executed in 1966. Many of Qutb’s followers later left the Brotherhood’s embrace and went their own way, setting up militant organizations. No one could have guessed that the brutal crackdown against the Brotherhood would set in motion a chain of events that would have terrible consequences for the region and America. But the events of this week could have similarly profound implications. In the hours after Morsi’s ouster, the new military leadership suspended the Constitution, shut down at least three Islamist television stations, and, more ominously, issued arrest warrants for at least 300 Brotherhood members. Prominent liberal voices are calling for “dissolving” the Brotherhood and holding what would amount to dubious show trials. America finds itself in a tight spot. After the coup, President Obama expressed “deep concern,” steering clear of any explicit condemnation. More troubling, he called for the restoration of “a” — not “the” — democratically elected government, an important distinction that won’t be lost on the Brotherhood. This, too, bears the echoes of a not-so-distant past. In 1992, Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front was on the verge of a historic victory in free elections. But the Algerian Army intervened, annulling the results and rounding up thousands of Islamists, many of whom ended up in desert prison camps. Days before the crackdown began, one of the Salvation Front’s leaders, Abdelkader Hachani, warned a crowd of supporters what might be in store. “Victory is more dangerous than defeat,” he told them. Most Muslim Brotherhood leaders and activist in Egypt had strong apprehensions that the United States and other Western powers would simply not allow Islamists to assume power through democratic elections. For Americans Egypt has “democrats who are not liberals” (the Brotherhood) and “liberals who are not democrats” (the huge crowds in the street). The economic malaise once again helped to bring protesters to the streets, calling for Morsi’s overthrow—as they once did with Mubarak. During the ongoing demonstrations, alongside grievances over Morsi’s politics, young Egyptians regularly complained that they just can’t find work. “People don’t feel that the economic policy of Morsi is different from the economic policy of Mubarak,” says Hassan Aly, a professor at Ohio State University who specializes in Middle Eastern economies. In addition to saddling the country with corruption and unemployment, Mubarak’s government borrowed heavily to finance stimulus packages during the worldwide economic downturn, leaving Morsi to pick up the tab. “You had that whole period where people weren’t sharing the wealth. And then you had the global financial crisis, [with] the government draining its resources trying to keep the show on the road,” says Aley. “Morsi and his government didn’t really had a very strong hand to play.” But Mubarak’s final decade brought steady economic growth as the regime pursued liberalizing reforms. The problem for most Egyptians was what economists called “growth without development.” While a small segment of the population grew wealthier—mainly regime loyalists—almost everyone else continued to struggle, with millions forced to get by on less than $2 a day. . The unrest that has defined Egypt since the revolution, meanwhile, has seen capital flee the country while political instability keeps investors at bay. Foreign reserves have dwindled, and the Egyptian pound has dipped. The constant chaos has also drained Egypt’s tourism industry, leaving the economy with two main lifelines: aid from allies and remittances from Egyptians working abroad. With its extraordinary concentration of population, ninety percent of Egypt’s total area, that is, about, one million square kilometers is desert, and hence unsuitable for settlement or for cultivation. The inhabitable and cultivable land is only about 35000 square kilometers, which makes Egypt one of the most thickly populated countries in the world with a density of 369 per square kilometers.. Egypt’s political stalemate has intensified the problems, with many observers blaming it for the delay of a critical IMF loan. (Egypt’s point man in the tumultuous negotiations resigned this week) Everyone is looking to the IMF to help out, But the IMF’s position is [that they] want broad political consensus and broad political support for any program. There’s no way they’re going to get it. To limit the fallout from last month’s events, Egypt’s new government must ensure that the Brotherhood and its Freedom and Justice Party are reincorporated into the political process and free to contest — and win or lose — parliamentary and presidential elections. Otherwise, Islamist parties’ faith in democracy could be irrevocably damaged. The author is a Professor in Political Science and can
Posted on: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:54:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015