Egyptians still congratulate one another on the success of the people’s “revolution”—which some cynics term “an insurrection” whereas, in reality, they are no nearer achieving so-called freedom and democracy than they ever were.
On Sunday, clashes in Cairo between Christian Copts, protesting against the torching of a church in southern Egypt, and thugs led to an intervention by state security forces which resulted in at least 25 deaths. The country’s interim prime minister, Essam Sharaf, said the “unjustified” violence “raised fear and concerns about the future of this homeland” and threatened Egypt’s transition to democracy.
Essam Sharaf is absolutely right, as every such incident gives the military rulers an excuse to hold on to the power they’ve enjoyed since the 1952 army coup that overthrew Britain’s puppet, King Farouk. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is currently under pressure from Western powers to respond to the demands of the Egyptian street by organizing free, fair and monitored elections and binning emergency laws.
Yet, those same Western powers expect the military to protect foreign embassies and their interests in country. When an angry mob broke into the Israeli Embassy in Cairo recently, removing the flag and scattering documents to the wind, the US swiftly told the military that it was duty bound under international law to safeguard embassies and warned of severe consequences in the event of a similar occurrence.
In fact, the Supreme Council is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t, as the West has made it crystal clear that in the event an Islamist government is voted into power its relations with Egypt will suffer. This has echoes of the way the Palestinians were pressured to hold elections only to find themselves isolated and vilified when the people’s choice, Hamas, came out on top.
The potential for Islamists to gain control is high in a country where over 20 percent of the population subsists below the poverty line and the per capita GDP is just $6,200, as the very poorest rely on groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood for food, medicines and education. In any future election, they are, therefore, unlikely to bite the hand that’s been feeding them.
Subsequent to the civil uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak and his cronies, the people, chanting “the army and the people one hand,” felt the military was on their side while the Supreme Council went out of its way to pander to the people’s every demand. With the streets free of police and with soldiers atop tanks standing apart from the fray, there was an impression that ordinary Egyptians were dictating terms.
However, it seems the Supreme Council decided “enough is enough” following the attack on the Israeli embassy, warning the army would use live bullets against violent troublemakers endangering not only foreign diplomatic missions but also ministries, state institutions and police stations. Any such persons would be regarded as thugs, the military announced, and would be dealt with by army tribunals. This decision has fed the concerns of those who believe the military is dragging its heels when it comes to organizing a ballot and feel the revolution’s young martyrs may have died in vain.
If they only knew it, Egyptians are shooting themselves in the foot with their constant organized protests, marches, strikes and sectarian squabbles. They may be enjoying the heady taste of freedom but this is only an illusion as true freedom cannot exist without security, which currently only the military is in a position to provide.
Moreover, what value does freedom have when there are millions without jobs and millions more who exist on a staple diet of foul madames (mashed fava beans), falafel, rice, pasta accompanied by rough round loaves with the consistency of sandpaper? Democracy is no panacea for those families who can’t afford milk for their babies or medicines for chronic conditions such as asthma or diabetes. Unless this potentially wealthy country can get its economy on an even footing, which can only be achieved in an environment of safety and security, freedom will have a bitter taste.
Without a stable economy, democracy is worth nothing, as we see now in the “Mother of Democracy” Greece which is on the point of bankruptcy. While I fully empathize with Egyptian sentiments and their impatience to throw-off the yoke of state control, I feel their hurry to democracy is ill placed. In countries where democracy works even imperfectly, it took centuries before a semblance of personal freedom could emerge. It wasn’t that long ago when British women were barred from voting and African Americans were forbidden from sitting next to whites on a bus.
For the sake of all Egyptians of all faiths and from all strata of society, the best solution would be for the military to remain in charge for, say, three years giving the country’s finances time to stabilize, new parties to form and allowing voters to familiarize themselves with the issues at stake. In the meantime, the military rulers should maintain security without being heavy-handed, root out corruption, improve educational standards, get the unemployed back to work and create an investor-friendly climate. The main problem is that the military would first need to convince the people that it has their best interests at heart and will relinquish the reins of power on the promised date. No easy task!
As someone who loves Egypt and greatly admires the stoicism and good humor displayed by most Egyptians in the face of great hardship, I wish to see the country bloom but like most things in life worth having this will take time.
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.
RSS
Egypt’s democracy under threat
Posted on October 12, 2011 by Linda S. Heard
Egyptians still congratulate one another on the success of the people’s “revolution”—which some cynics term “an insurrection” whereas, in reality, they are no nearer achieving so-called freedom and democracy than they ever were.
On Sunday, clashes in Cairo between Christian Copts, protesting against the torching of a church in southern Egypt, and thugs led to an intervention by state security forces which resulted in at least 25 deaths. The country’s interim prime minister, Essam Sharaf, said the “unjustified” violence “raised fear and concerns about the future of this homeland” and threatened Egypt’s transition to democracy.
Essam Sharaf is absolutely right, as every such incident gives the military rulers an excuse to hold on to the power they’ve enjoyed since the 1952 army coup that overthrew Britain’s puppet, King Farouk. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is currently under pressure from Western powers to respond to the demands of the Egyptian street by organizing free, fair and monitored elections and binning emergency laws.
Yet, those same Western powers expect the military to protect foreign embassies and their interests in country. When an angry mob broke into the Israeli Embassy in Cairo recently, removing the flag and scattering documents to the wind, the US swiftly told the military that it was duty bound under international law to safeguard embassies and warned of severe consequences in the event of a similar occurrence.
In fact, the Supreme Council is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t, as the West has made it crystal clear that in the event an Islamist government is voted into power its relations with Egypt will suffer. This has echoes of the way the Palestinians were pressured to hold elections only to find themselves isolated and vilified when the people’s choice, Hamas, came out on top.
The potential for Islamists to gain control is high in a country where over 20 percent of the population subsists below the poverty line and the per capita GDP is just $6,200, as the very poorest rely on groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood for food, medicines and education. In any future election, they are, therefore, unlikely to bite the hand that’s been feeding them.
Subsequent to the civil uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak and his cronies, the people, chanting “the army and the people one hand,” felt the military was on their side while the Supreme Council went out of its way to pander to the people’s every demand. With the streets free of police and with soldiers atop tanks standing apart from the fray, there was an impression that ordinary Egyptians were dictating terms.
However, it seems the Supreme Council decided “enough is enough” following the attack on the Israeli embassy, warning the army would use live bullets against violent troublemakers endangering not only foreign diplomatic missions but also ministries, state institutions and police stations. Any such persons would be regarded as thugs, the military announced, and would be dealt with by army tribunals. This decision has fed the concerns of those who believe the military is dragging its heels when it comes to organizing a ballot and feel the revolution’s young martyrs may have died in vain.
If they only knew it, Egyptians are shooting themselves in the foot with their constant organized protests, marches, strikes and sectarian squabbles. They may be enjoying the heady taste of freedom but this is only an illusion as true freedom cannot exist without security, which currently only the military is in a position to provide.
Moreover, what value does freedom have when there are millions without jobs and millions more who exist on a staple diet of foul madames (mashed fava beans), falafel, rice, pasta accompanied by rough round loaves with the consistency of sandpaper? Democracy is no panacea for those families who can’t afford milk for their babies or medicines for chronic conditions such as asthma or diabetes. Unless this potentially wealthy country can get its economy on an even footing, which can only be achieved in an environment of safety and security, freedom will have a bitter taste.
Without a stable economy, democracy is worth nothing, as we see now in the “Mother of Democracy” Greece which is on the point of bankruptcy. While I fully empathize with Egyptian sentiments and their impatience to throw-off the yoke of state control, I feel their hurry to democracy is ill placed. In countries where democracy works even imperfectly, it took centuries before a semblance of personal freedom could emerge. It wasn’t that long ago when British women were barred from voting and African Americans were forbidden from sitting next to whites on a bus.
For the sake of all Egyptians of all faiths and from all strata of society, the best solution would be for the military to remain in charge for, say, three years giving the country’s finances time to stabilize, new parties to form and allowing voters to familiarize themselves with the issues at stake. In the meantime, the military rulers should maintain security without being heavy-handed, root out corruption, improve educational standards, get the unemployed back to work and create an investor-friendly climate. The main problem is that the military would first need to convince the people that it has their best interests at heart and will relinquish the reins of power on the promised date. No easy task!
As someone who loves Egypt and greatly admires the stoicism and good humor displayed by most Egyptians in the face of great hardship, I wish to see the country bloom but like most things in life worth having this will take time.
Linda S. Heard is a British specialist writer on Middle East affairs. She welcomes feedback and can be contacted by email at heardonthegrapevines@yahoo.co.uk.