Friday, November 21, 2014

Egypt’s Democracy in Reverse

NEW DELHI – Egypt has had a long and difficult couple of years. From January 25, 2011, when millions of people poured into the streets to rally against Hosni Mubarak’s regime, to the army’s recent overthrow of President Mohamed Morsi, the country has experienced a fall from euphoria into division and frustration – a pattern that seems to have become an inescapable feature of revolution. Was Egypt’s democratic transition doomed from the start?

Although Egypt’s revolution followed Tunisia’s, it was the successful overthrow of Mubarak’s regime that gave rise to the moniker “Arab Spring.” But, despite the country’s ostensible progress from Mubarak’s military-backed dictatorship to Morsi’s democratically elected government, it appears that not much has changed. Indeed, the army is now suppressing another “people’s revolt” – this time, by supporters of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

With Egypt’s military restoring its grip on power, the country’s hoped-for political renaissance is slipping from view. Although plans for a new constitution and fresh elections in the next six months have been announced, the waywardness of the coup’s aftermath – reflected in the death of more than 50 protesters and the arrest of hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood supporters and their leaders – calls into question a democratic future.

External factors further undermine Egypt’s democratic prospects – and those of the Arab Spring countries that have viewed Egypt as a model. The brutal suppression of popular rebellion in Syria by President Bashar al-Assad’s Ba’athist government raises doubts that Arab countries will soon escape their legacy of oppressive leadership. On the contrary, the deepening in recent years of the long-standing Sunni-Shia schism throughout the Muslim world heralds further violence.

Given that the outcome of Egypt’s transition will have far-reaching consequences in the region, the country is under pressure from all sides. Saudi Arabia, for example, has embraced the military takeover, granting (together with the United Arab Emirates) $8 billion in immediate aid. As the Israeli novelist and essayist David Goldman put it, Egypt’s future now “depends on what happens in the royal palace at Riyadh, not in Tahrir Square.”

Saudi Arabian commentators have lauded General Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, the head of Egypt’s military. Asharq al-Awsat’s Hussein Shobokshi wrote, “God has endowed al-Sisi with the Egyptians’ love,” declaring that al-Sisi brought “true legitimacy to Egypt…after a period of pointlessness, immaturity, and distress.” Others speculated that, had the Muslim Brotherhood remained in office, Egypt would have become “North Korea on the Nile.”

Saudi Arabia’s involvement in Egypt suggests that a new pan-Arab fault line may be emerging, parallel to the Shia-Sunni one, with the Muslim Brotherhood on one side and the Sunni monarchies and secular military regimes on the other. If so, Egypt’s democratic prospects have not just dimmed; they have most likely been eliminated entirely.

This uncertainty may partly explain America’s hesitation to make any definitive policy decisions regarding Egypt. So far, the United States has refused to call Morsi’s overthrow a “coup” – thereby avoiding the domestic legal obligation to discontinue economic and military assistance while President Barack Obama’s administration examines its options.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney explained that America’s relationship with Egypt “is bound up in America’s support for the aspirations of the Egyptian people for democracy, for a better economic and political future.” Translation: Any decision regarding US policy toward Egypt will be informed by US foreign-policy objectives, Congress, and US law.

But, by continuing to provide aid to Egypt, while neglecting to impose any concrete demands on Egypt’s new military leadership, the US has tacitly accepted the coup, which has made Egypt appear like a “banana republic.” Such an image cannot be useful in creating the kind of stable and outward-looking Egypt that the US wants as a cornerstone for regional stability.

Given the fragility of the Egyptian military’s position, and the ambiguity of US policy in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood may now choose to wait patiently for an opportunity to regain control of Egypt’s government. But its commitment to democratic principles may be seriously weakened. One hopes that a recent comment by the deputy head of the Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing – “Do you know how many people died building the pyramids? How many died digging the Suez Canal?” – does not reflect the Brotherhood’s willingness to accept the most extreme levels of sacrifice in order to achieve its goals.

The stakes could not be higher for Egypt. Sheik Ahmed el-Tayeb, the grand imam of Cairo’s Al-Azhar Mosque (the main seat of learning for Sunni Muslims worldwide), has warned of an impending civil war. Whether el-Tayeb is proved right depends on who has the final say in Egypt’s transition: the military, the Muslim Brotherhood, or a political force like the Salafist Al Nour party, which gained one-quarter of the vote in the last election and supported the military’s overthrow of Morsi.

Democracy is, by definition, the first casualty of Morsi’s downfall. The question now is whether the social rifts that the coup has opened – in Egypt and the wider Arab world – will become too deep to be bridged by any democratic path in the foreseeable future.

  • Contact us to secure rights


  • Hide Comments Hide Comments Read Comments (8)

    Please login or register to post a comment

    1. Commentedotto ruthenberg

      Well, it may not matter too much if Egypt's govmt is democratic or autocratic as the none can deliver on the promise of a better life for most of its people. Egypt is poor and getting poorer with a restive urban population. Beware of putting much hope in foreign help. The US only pretends interest in Egypt but primarily wants to stabilize the frontier to Israel. Saudis want any kind of peace in their neighborhood. Europe will provide words but little tangible stuff. Egypt cannot reciprocate investments on any front. A fight for nile water is upcoming with Egypt in a weak position. Egypt is in for a period of prolonged social unrest with noone in power. It may well become a failed state with the only functioning institution a military propped up by the US.

    2. CommentedJohn Brian Shannon

      Nice post Jaswant, and it is an accurate snapshot in time of the state of affairs in Egypt, mid-July 2013.

      The path to democracy, is not a destination, but an ongoing process.

      Even the U.S. Constitution makes reference to this, as it says in its opening, constitutional amendments were permitted, and even promoted; “to form a more perfect Union”.

      Therefore, we can't say that Egypt didn't have democracy, or that it did. But it was 'on the path' towards democracy.

      Morsi WAS democratically elected, whether we in the West were happy about this turn of events, or not.

      EU, UN, and other election monitors pronounced it a valid election result, with only minor flaws.

      The coup which removed Morsi, was certainly not democratic, it was one mob in the streets against another mob.

      Hardly a democratic vote.

      No doubt, "someone jumped the gun" and removed Morsi from power, jailed legitimately elected MB parliamentarians, and wreaked havoc with due process.

      Whether Egypt had been a perfect democracy, prior to the coup, is irrelevant.

      All countries on the planet, do NOT have a perfect democracy, just ask any of their citizens in case you don't believe that, just as Sir Winston Churchill said.

      My point is;

      What is relevant, is that Egypt WAS on the path to democracy and now, it's not.

      Cheers, JBS

        CommentedJohn Brian Shannon

        "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

        CommentedJohn Brian Shannon

        "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill

    3. CommentedFrank O'Callaghan

      It was clearly a coup. Democracy is a casualty not just in Egypt but in the US as well. That the Americans will not call it a coup in order to continue supporting the army is a clear test failed for democracy in America.

      Democracy has a clear implication of equality between citizens, one vote is not greater than another.

    4. CommentedJose araujo

      This is another confusion due to global warming, Arab spring turned to be Arab winter

    5. CommentedJesse Parent

      I really don''t see how democracy is the first casualty. That implies that it was alive and well. Elections do not a democracy make, only in name and appearance.

        CommentedJesse Parent

        I see democracy as a process ('and not a product'), but more so, a long process. Some (like Jeffrey Sachs) have argued that reinstating Morsi would help reinstate democracy, but I don't feel that having elections or semblance of governance helps. It's better to work slowly to build reliable institutionalized governance and power structures, rather than to 'show off' the most visible aspects of democracy, only in turn to have them amount to nothing.