On Monday millions of Egyptians went home with a purple fingertip. A people who have never experienced free and fair elections in their lives were keen to participate in round one of a 12-round parliamentary electoral process scheduled to last four months.
Lengthy queues outside polling stations winded down streets and around squares. People who have never voted in their lives had come out to cast their vote, even the elderly and ailing. There was also a propensity of women eager to have their say. This should be an occasion of great excitement and joy; it should be but it isn’t when so many mistrust their military rulers. Many are skeptical that their vote will make a real difference.
Proceeding with the ballot at a time when the country was in turmoil was a wise strategy on the part of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). Demonstrators in Cairo’s Tahrir Square who maintained they elections were a farce as long as the SCAF was the hand that rocked the cradle and vowed not to leave as long as Field Marshall Tantawi was still in his job, have joined the queues. Although some said they would simply use their ballot papers to send the message that the military must relinquish power.
Keeping the population distracted was a clever move. However, although there are many safeguards to ensure one-man-one-vote without pressure from candidates, the powers that be have failed when it comes to logistics. Many would-be voters were furious that some polling stations remained closed because ballot papers hadn’t been received or judges tasked with monitoring the process hadn’t bothered to turn up. Such frustration is a recipe for potential violence when voters have to stand for hours in the cold awaiting the doors to open or join the end of the queue in another location.
Most pundits say Islamic parties, such as the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, can look forward to big wins. They may be right when a number of secular and progressive parties have withdrawn from the race as part of their anti-SCAF protest along with a number of independents. All they’ve done is to cut off their nose to spite their face, playing right into the hands of parties that are participating. Withdrawal doesn’t hurt anyone apart from their own constituents.
No matter how imperfect, Egyptians should work with what they have and consider these elections as the first rung on democracy’s ladder. A country can’t operate normally as long as consecutive “revolutions” are taking place. The people have made their voices heard loud and clear; now it’s the moment to build.
Due to their protests, they’ve gained a new prime minister, Kamal Ganzouri, a once popular politician who garnered a reputation for assisting the poor. He has agreed to head a “national salvation” government and is, by all accounts, a good human being.
It’s thought that presidential contenders, former Arab League chief Amr Moussa and former head of the nuclear watchdog the IAEA, Mohammed ElBaradei, were first offered that post, but chose to turn it down. If that’s so, ElBaradei has since changed his mind, saying he’s willing to give up his presidential ambitions. He’s certainly more acceptable to the revolutionary youth who perceive Ganzouri who served under Mubarak as being tainted by the old regime and too old to represent the young generation’s interests. But ElBaradei’s “sacrifice” has come too late.
Demonstrators have also managed to extract a commitment from the SCAF to bring forward presidential elections from 2013 to end June/early July next year when, according to Field Marshall Tantawi, SCAF is “fully prepared to immediately hand over power and to return to their original duty of protecting the homeland.” His promise was received in Tahrir like a damp squib.
Since, Tantawi has been in no mood to appease the crowds and has started to talk tough. Determined to press on with the elections against opposition from activists, he announced: “We are at a crossroads. There are only two routes, the success of elections leading Egypt toward safety or facing dangerous hurdles that we in the armed forces, as part of the Egyptian people, will not allow.” He warned of “extremely grave” consequences if the country’s crisis continues and said he would not permit “troublemakers” to interfere in the electoral process.
While I sympathize with demonstrators concerned that the Jan. 25 popular uprising merely swapped President Hosni Mubarak for military rule, I think it’s time for them to take a more pragmatic approach. They should keep up the pressure without destroying the country’s fragile economy and scaring away foreign tourists. They would also be wise to accept that the SCAF isn’t going to give up its power and privilege overnight when it’s been in control behind the scenes since the 1952 coup and now either owns or controls between 20 percent and 40 percent of the economy.
Knowing the Egyptian people as well as I do after living among them for seven years, I sincerely believe they will achieve their democratic goals and succeed in eroding SCAF’s power given time, determination and, most important of all, patience. There has to be a balance between the people’s wants and the country’s needs. What use is democracy in an economic wasteland? And, by the same token, economic growth isn’t the be-all and end-all in a climate of corruption and oppression. My gut feeling tells me everything will work out for the best. For the sake of the wonderful kind and generous Egyptians I’ve come to know, I hope I’m right.
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.
