Who will rule Egypt?
ruler because they now know the ways of | Wednesday, 6 April 2011
ruler because they now know the ways of
Ashraful Azad and M. Mizanur Rahman Arab autocrats are falling down. The situation can be compared with the fall of communism in Eastern Europe. None could predict such mass uprisings against the long ruling iron men. Already Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak are down. Gaddafi of Libya, Assad of Syria and Saleh of Yemen are struggling to survive. What next? Who will fill the power vacuum in these countries in the absence of any substantial democratic practices and institutions? Governments may take different forms in different countries with some significant similarities. Here, let's explore the most important case, Egypt. Power transitions in the region have rarely been at ease let alone democratic. Rulers died, were killed or forced to leave office for the more powerful opponents. So called preachers of liberal democracy, western states sought to keep single man in power with extraordinary control rather than complex democratic system, as it is easy to fulfill all interests at a single place for any economic and political reason. Those who refused to be managed got the fate like Saddam Hussein. During the cold war it was possible to choose between USA and the Soviet Union (USSR). But after the fall of communism there remained no alternative except coming under US umbrella. Exceptions like Iran have to live with heavy restrictions and economic sanctions, and must maintain close ties with alternative power China, Russia, Brazil and India. Unfortunately for the USA, free and fair elections in the region did not serve her interests. Through democratic elections, Hamas won in Palestine, Hezbullah got a crucial control over the politics of Lebanon. These two parties were enlisted as terrorist organizations by the USA. In the nearby Turkey, pro-Islamists AKP formed government in spite of extreme opposition from US-supported army. So, here democracy became an uncomfortable idea for the western advocates. During the 30-year rule of Hosni Mubarak, no political opposition could flourish other than Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Founded in 1928 by Hassan Al Banna, MB became the most organized political group in Egypt and some other Arab states. In spite of cruel repression from different governments, it succeeded to mange several million dedicated supporters. Initially it used violence but later opted for social services to scale up support base. It is said that MB pioneered the modernist Islamic movement all over the world. One of its well-known leaders Sayyid Qutb popularised the idea that Islam was not just a belief but also a political system. He said that any country that wasn't Islamist in essence had a government who were apostates. Among the ideological children of Qutb, Maolana Maududi and Osama bin Laden are notable. Islamic political parties in many countries followed the strategy of MB; providing services like education, and healthcare to attract attention. MB was banned in Egypt since the 1950s. Only in 2005, Mubarak permitted them to compete in election as independent candidates. They secured 20 percent seats in the parliament, though Mubarak supporters were involved in widespread rigging. Recent uprising which overthrew Mubarak was surely not organized by MB. They just followed it and tried to spread anger in the popular marches. This is a great gift of history for them. After the overthrow of Mubarak, Egypt has been passing through a chaotic situation. There is no stable authority. Haroon Moghul, the New York City-based director of The Maydan Institute, said in an interview with AOL News that people will start to look at those who can provide order, and that's always the big, organized Islamist groups. He also said about the MB that, "They are the biggest opposition group, with several million members. They run huge social service programs. That's primarily the reason for their support and their strength." But he ruled out the possibility that Egypt will be next Iran. In case of Iran, even the Marxists were an important part of the 1979 revolution against Shah. They didn't know that later it would be an Islamic republic. But the followers of Khomeini succeeded to mark it as the first Islamic revolution of the world history. Ironically, it happened in the most progressive Middle Eastern state where there was nothing like Islamic republic for thousands of years. However, Egypt is somewhat different from Iran. There is no charismatic Khomeini and it is 2011. It was reported in New York Times that Egypt's was a revolution of diversity, a proliferation of voices - of youth, women and workers, as well as the religious - all of which will struggle for influence. Here, political Islam will most likely face a new kind of challenge: proving its relevance and popularity in a country undergoing seismic change. In an interview with Elisabeth Braw of Metro World News, Boutros-Ghali, former Egyptian foreign minister, the first Arab, and first African, to serve as the UN Secretary-General commented that "the power of the Muslim Brotherhood has been exaggerated. It's a European obsession more than an Arab reality. What happened in Egypt wasn't planned or done by the Muslim Brotherhood. But the interpretation in the West is that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over in Egypt now". He explained that the reaction in Europe was connected to Europeans' anti-Islamic attitudes. Because of their anti-Islamic attitudes, Europeans believe that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over. It is also clear from his argument that election-based democracy would empower Islamists who may turn to fascist or Nazi style government. And so, he suggested that religious political parties should be banned. Ed Husain, an expert on Islamist movements and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera that "The US, and not just media, but the policy makers and others, view the Middle East through three prisms: One is of Israel, the second is of oil and the third is of terrorism". He also added, "I don't think that the twitter, Face book, tattoo generation of young Egyptians that essentially overthrew the Mubarak regime will sit around and wait for some fundamentalist regime to appear". Another important actor in the process of king making is army. If it is inevitable that Islamists are coming to power, the US will prefer the secular army to take control. It will be wrong for west to view the developments in Egypt through oriental lenses. And if you want democracy, you can not ban anyone to elect or be elected. We can not sink into self judgment in identifying the proper system for the people of the country. Ultimately, the ballot box will determine the future of Egypt. And whoever comes to office, the people will not tolerate any other authoritarian ruler because they now know the ways of overthrowing an autocrat. The writers Ashraful Azad and M. Mizanur Rahman work in the Development Research Network D.Net. They can be reached at E-mail: [email protected]
Ashraful Azad and M. Mizanur Rahman Arab autocrats are falling down. The situation can be compared with the fall of communism in Eastern Europe. None could predict such mass uprisings against the long ruling iron men. Already Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak are down. Gaddafi of Libya, Assad of Syria and Saleh of Yemen are struggling to survive. What next? Who will fill the power vacuum in these countries in the absence of any substantial democratic practices and institutions? Governments may take different forms in different countries with some significant similarities. Here, let's explore the most important case, Egypt. Power transitions in the region have rarely been at ease let alone democratic. Rulers died, were killed or forced to leave office for the more powerful opponents. So called preachers of liberal democracy, western states sought to keep single man in power with extraordinary control rather than complex democratic system, as it is easy to fulfill all interests at a single place for any economic and political reason. Those who refused to be managed got the fate like Saddam Hussein. During the cold war it was possible to choose between USA and the Soviet Union (USSR). But after the fall of communism there remained no alternative except coming under US umbrella. Exceptions like Iran have to live with heavy restrictions and economic sanctions, and must maintain close ties with alternative power China, Russia, Brazil and India. Unfortunately for the USA, free and fair elections in the region did not serve her interests. Through democratic elections, Hamas won in Palestine, Hezbullah got a crucial control over the politics of Lebanon. These two parties were enlisted as terrorist organizations by the USA. In the nearby Turkey, pro-Islamists AKP formed government in spite of extreme opposition from US-supported army. So, here democracy became an uncomfortable idea for the western advocates. During the 30-year rule of Hosni Mubarak, no political opposition could flourish other than Muslim Brotherhood (MB). Founded in 1928 by Hassan Al Banna, MB became the most organized political group in Egypt and some other Arab states. In spite of cruel repression from different governments, it succeeded to mange several million dedicated supporters. Initially it used violence but later opted for social services to scale up support base. It is said that MB pioneered the modernist Islamic movement all over the world. One of its well-known leaders Sayyid Qutb popularised the idea that Islam was not just a belief but also a political system. He said that any country that wasn't Islamist in essence had a government who were apostates. Among the ideological children of Qutb, Maolana Maududi and Osama bin Laden are notable. Islamic political parties in many countries followed the strategy of MB; providing services like education, and healthcare to attract attention. MB was banned in Egypt since the 1950s. Only in 2005, Mubarak permitted them to compete in election as independent candidates. They secured 20 percent seats in the parliament, though Mubarak supporters were involved in widespread rigging. Recent uprising which overthrew Mubarak was surely not organized by MB. They just followed it and tried to spread anger in the popular marches. This is a great gift of history for them. After the overthrow of Mubarak, Egypt has been passing through a chaotic situation. There is no stable authority. Haroon Moghul, the New York City-based director of The Maydan Institute, said in an interview with AOL News that people will start to look at those who can provide order, and that's always the big, organized Islamist groups. He also said about the MB that, "They are the biggest opposition group, with several million members. They run huge social service programs. That's primarily the reason for their support and their strength." But he ruled out the possibility that Egypt will be next Iran. In case of Iran, even the Marxists were an important part of the 1979 revolution against Shah. They didn't know that later it would be an Islamic republic. But the followers of Khomeini succeeded to mark it as the first Islamic revolution of the world history. Ironically, it happened in the most progressive Middle Eastern state where there was nothing like Islamic republic for thousands of years. However, Egypt is somewhat different from Iran. There is no charismatic Khomeini and it is 2011. It was reported in New York Times that Egypt's was a revolution of diversity, a proliferation of voices - of youth, women and workers, as well as the religious - all of which will struggle for influence. Here, political Islam will most likely face a new kind of challenge: proving its relevance and popularity in a country undergoing seismic change. In an interview with Elisabeth Braw of Metro World News, Boutros-Ghali, former Egyptian foreign minister, the first Arab, and first African, to serve as the UN Secretary-General commented that "the power of the Muslim Brotherhood has been exaggerated. It's a European obsession more than an Arab reality. What happened in Egypt wasn't planned or done by the Muslim Brotherhood. But the interpretation in the West is that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over in Egypt now". He explained that the reaction in Europe was connected to Europeans' anti-Islamic attitudes. Because of their anti-Islamic attitudes, Europeans believe that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over. It is also clear from his argument that election-based democracy would empower Islamists who may turn to fascist or Nazi style government. And so, he suggested that religious political parties should be banned. Ed Husain, an expert on Islamist movements and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera that "The US, and not just media, but the policy makers and others, view the Middle East through three prisms: One is of Israel, the second is of oil and the third is of terrorism". He also added, "I don't think that the twitter, Face book, tattoo generation of young Egyptians that essentially overthrew the Mubarak regime will sit around and wait for some fundamentalist regime to appear". Another important actor in the process of king making is army. If it is inevitable that Islamists are coming to power, the US will prefer the secular army to take control. It will be wrong for west to view the developments in Egypt through oriental lenses. And if you want democracy, you can not ban anyone to elect or be elected. We can not sink into self judgment in identifying the proper system for the people of the country. Ultimately, the ballot box will determine the future of Egypt. And whoever comes to office, the people will not tolerate any other authoritarian ruler because they now know the ways of overthrowing an autocrat. The writers Ashraful Azad and M. Mizanur Rahman work in the Development Research Network D.Net. They can be reached at E-mail: [email protected]