Opening statements
- Anoush Ehteshami
The forces for reform and democratisation will become so overwhelming in the next few months that in a year's time, and despite setbacks and more tragedies on the way, Egypt will be becoming a democracy.
- Daniel Pipes
It is out of the question that an Egypt with minor experience in democracy can put together enough of these components in 12 months to establish a fully democratic order.
Events have moved fast in Egypt in the past ten days. Huge demonstrations calling for the resignation of Egypt's ageing president, Hosni Mubarak, have rocked the country. Mostly peaceful for the first week, they have turned violent leaving hundreds dead and thousands injured. In an attempt to calm the protesters Mr Mubarak appointed a vice-president, his first in his 30-year reign. But his attempts at conciliation look too little, too late. The protesters want him to go now. Cairo's walls are daubed with slogans telling him so: "game over, Mubarak".
A debate is raging not just in Arab countries but all over the world about whether democracy in Egypt is possible or desirable. The history of revolutions is mixed. Those who have long mourned the dearth of democracy in the Middle East are full of hope that this will be an "Arab spring". Others remember more gloomily the massive protests in Iran in 2009. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians surged onto the streets after a disputed election, calling for democracy, freedom and change in Iran. The government crushed the opposition Green movement with an iron fist and a year and a half later, there is no sign of any significant reforms in Iran.
Others are more doubtful. Even if the protests succeed in unseating Mr Mubarak, it is unclear what the future holds for Egypt. After three decades of Mr Mubarak's authoritarian rule, many of Egypt's institutions look rotten to the core. Corruption is rife, press freedom is curtailed, and any elections that have been held have been rigged by the ruling party.
Some worry whether democracy would be a good thing in Egypt at all. Their concern is that in the absence of those institutions, chaos will reign. Or perhaps worse in their minds, were elections to be held, they fear that they would be hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group that has been Egypt's best-organised and most prominent opposition force for many years. They point fearfully to Palestinian and Lebanese elections where Islamists have done well. Israel is particularly uneasy, anxious about the end of its "cold peace" with Egypt and the instability that could bring.
Others argue that Islamists are not antithetical to democracy; look at Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia. They say too that Egypt has a well-educated middle class, a sophisticated elite and enough of a sense of national pride to turn the chaos of this week's demonstrations into the beginnings of democracy. Egypt has reached a tipping point, they say. The genie is out of the bottle and there is no stuffing it back in. Egyptians have tasted freedom and are now shrugging off autocracy and seizing their chance for democracy.
We have two of the best-qualified people in the world to debate these issues on our website. They are both long-time Middle East watchers. Anoush Ehteshami, who is proposing the motion, is professor of international relations at Durham University, and has written extensively on Middle Eastern politics—foreign and domestic—and security in the region. Daniel Pipes, opposing it, is the founder and director of the Middle East Forum, a think-tank, and has written extensively about Islam and militant Islamism, within both the Middle East and the West.
Events may overtake this debate. We will try to keep up with them. I want to encourage the audience to comment and vote. A bit of democracy in action would be a good thing.
The scale of protest in Egypt since early January 2011 has been unprecedented and energising, even for a country used to riots and open expressions of discontent. The situation in Egypt in early February remains tense and the path opening up between the state and society is uncharted. But change is in the air, and against the backdrop of rapid regime change in Tunisia and protests taking root in many neighbouring Arab countries, one is left with a sense of anxiety that we are reaching a tipping point in the region. Change in Egypt will tip the balance towards the advocates of meaningful and rapid reform in the rest of the Arab region. So, what happens in Egypt in the coming days will have deep and long-lasting impact. Egypt, a country whose modern history can count only three presidents in office since 1954, is pivotal to the direction and intensity of change, and yet this is an Arab country ill equipped for rapid change. Its ruling political party institutions are strong, and despite the spectacular burning of the National Democratic Party (NDP) headquarters on Friday 28th January, the state machinery remains penetrated by party members and Mubarak loyalists. Also, the wider security establishment is thoroughly controlled by the Mubarak-created ruling elite. So, the imminent end of this regime and this president may have been exaggerated—for now.
In the months to come, though, even if Hosni Mubarak survives this intense period of domestic and Western pressure, I expect the political character of the establishment to change—towards what could be loosely referred to as a rocky road to democratisation. The widening of the political base and the broadening of public space will take place and in this process reformist forces will, like rainwater pouring into the cracks of rocks, penetrate the crust of the regime and the institutions and bureaucracy for so long dominated by the NDP and Mr Mubarak's allies and cronies. As they do they will flex their muscles and drive for transparency and the rule of law. Once these are established, the opposition will build on its street base to proceed towards negotiations.
Internally, the opposition forces will organise around a broad "rainbow" coalition, which will of course have to make its own compromises if it is to stick as a credible force. But this coalition is unlikely to survive the transition phase, and as open elections beckon we will see the consolidation of parties and platforms competing for power. The Muslim Brotherhood will be pitted against nationalist, liberal, pan-Arab, secular parties and this will be good for democracy and democratisation. The process will be long and painful, but the train of change has already left the station and with Mr Mubarak no longer a presidential candidate in 2011 his NDP has quickly lost its political fig leaf and also its legitimacy as the country's ruling party. With the NDP fatally weakened, I would anticipate the next president and indeed the next parliament to be wearing very different political clothes. What the leadership will be like is not the issue; the important point is that the new political leaders will have arrived in their posts credibly and with the open and transparent support of the electorate.
Externally, too, the constellation of forces lined up against the incumbent is likely to insist on a credible democratisation process being introduced in the next few weeks. Again, even if Mr Mubarak survives the current period of pressure, his regime will find it almost impossible to secure external support without the introduction of change and dialogue with the opposition. Mr Mubarak will have to give an inch and with every inch the opposition will try to take a foot. The balance will shift and the shift will become irreversible over time. Another external dimension is of course the country's trade and investment relations. Instability is anathema to business but it is unlikely that authoritarian stability will be acceptable either. In the age of the internet and the sight of the masses lined up against the incumbent, the international business community will find it impossible to support the president or advocate investment in the country. Economic imperative will generate its own pressures against the government and the momentum for broad economic reforms and transparency will provide more energy for pro-reform forces. Egypt cannot isolate itself from external pressure and that pressure now is for liberalisation and democratisation.
So, on balance, I believe that the forces for reform and democratisation will become so overwhelming in the next few months that in a year's time, and despite setbacks and more tragedies on the way, Egypt will be becoming a democracy.
Two reasons lead me to assert that the Arab Republic of Egypt will not boast a democratic political system this time next year.
First, democracy is more than holding elections; it requires the development of civil society, meaning such complex and counterintuitive institutions as the rule of law, an independent judiciary, multiple political parties, minority rights, voluntary associations, and freedom of expression, movement and assembly. Democracy is a learned habit, not an instinctive one, which requires deep attitudinal changes such as a culture of restraint, a commonality of values, a respect for differences of view, the concept of loyal opposition and a sense of civic responsibility.
Further, elections need to be practised to be made perfect. Ideally, a country starts electing at the municipal level and moves to the national, it begins with the legislative branch and moves to the executive. Simultaneously, the press needs to acquire full freedoms, political parties should mature, parliament should gain authority at the expense of the executive, and judges should adjudicate between them.
Such a transformation of society cannot take place within months or even years; the historical record shows that it takes decades fully to implement. It is out of the question that an Egypt with minor experience in democracy can put together enough of these components in 12 months to establish a fully democratic order.
Second, whichever scenario plays out, democracy is not in the offing.
• If Hosni Mubarak stays in power, unlikely but possible, he will be more of a tyrant than ever. As shown by his actions in recent days, he will not go quietly.
• If the military asserts more directly the power that it has wielded behind the scenes since its coup d'état of 1952, Omar Suleiman, the newly-appointed vice president, would presumably become president. He would make changes to the system, eliminating the most obvious abuses under Mr Mubarak, but not fundamentally offering Egyptians a say in the regime that rules them. Algeria 1992, where a military-backed government repressed Islamists, provides a precedent.
• If Islamists come to power, they will foment a revolution along the lines of Iran in 1979, in which their belief in God's sovereignty trumps political participation by the masses. The inherently anti-democratic nature of the Islamist movement must not be obscured by the Islamists' willingness to use elections to reach power. In the prescient words of an American official in 1992, the Islamists forward a programme of "one person, one vote, one time".
However looked at – abstractly or specifically – Egyptians are in for a rough ride, without the prospect of choosing their leaders.
No comments:
Post a Comment