June 15, 2014
Egypt’s presidential
election: A counter-revolution
M. Serajul Islam
 |
Egypt’s “Arab Spring” has turned sour and the
country has another new era Hosne Mubarak who appears to have more grandiose
visions of military rule than his predecessors including Gamal Abdel Nasser
into whose footsteps he is trying to step. In the just concluded presidential
election, the script was the same up to even the minor details as all the
presidential elections held during President Mubarak’s 30 years of dictatorial
rule of Egypt that were always short on credibility.
The new strongman of Egypt has chosen for himself the title that his illustrious predecessors did not have. Gamal Abdel Nasser was merely a Colonel, while Hosne Mubarak was a General. The new President of Egypt has the title of a Field Marshal. In the presidential run-off, he won 96.91% of the votes leaving nothing practically for his poor opponent. Only 47% of the voters turned out on Election Day compared to the 52% that had turned out when Egypt had its last presidential elections two years ago that had elected Dr. Mohammad Morsi as the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 2005, when Egypt had its first direct presidential election, Hosne Mubarak had polled 88.6% of the 22.9% of voters that had turned out to vote.
The way Dr. Morsi was ousted is history. There was of course a lot that had gone wrong in the 13 months the MB had been in power in democratic Egypt. The MB was in a hurry to implement its Islamists agenda. They way it hurried through the drafting and implementing the new Constitution of Egypt without due consultations with the other groups in society and parliament was a grave error. It instantly and rightly upset the secular forces in the country that had been instrumental in bringing down the dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
The equally serious mistake of the Muslim Brotherhood was its failure to consider that although it had won both the parliamentary and presidential elections, it was not the majority in the society and the country. It had failed to realize that there was no way that its Islamic fundamentalist agenda would be accepted without compromise with the secular forces whose role in the “Arab Spring” was more significant than its own. During its short hold on power, the MB government had also indulged in acts of persecution against its political opponents and minorities similar to those committed during the military dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
Nevertheless, its mistakes notwithstanding, the MB had earned the right to rule and legislate the affairs of the country democratically. Therefore, the way the elected President Dr. Mohammad Morsi was removed and the legislature dissolved were also a denial of democracy and democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt. The persecution of MB supporters by the military regime of FM Sisi surpassed those by the regime of Hosne Mubarak on its opponents. Two instances of persecution of MB supporters were unbelievable. In March, the military backed Egyptian court sentenced 529 MB supporters to death for attacking a police station where many who were sentenced were not even present and many were not even members of the MB. In April, the court sentenced 683 MB supporters including some leaders of the party to death for killing one policeman!
These two cases stand out as unique instances in history where so many individuals had been sentenced in a court for killing just one individual; a policeman! Nevertheless, these instances also underlined the determination of the military rulers of Egypt to exterminate the MB for good. There was no doubt that the type of rule that Field Marshal Abdel Fatah el Sisi promised Egypt was welcomed by many who were fed up with the long period of instability following the downfall of General Mubarak that had a disastrous impact on the country’s economy. The Field Marshal was in fact brought to power by the very forces that had ousted the regime of Hosne Mubarak in the wake of Arab Spring, minus the MB that had supported that movement from the outside that had dissuaded the Americans from calling the take over by FM Sisi (then a General) a coup d’état.
Nevertheless, the take over turned out to be more than a mere coup d’état. The regime made no attempts to hide its intentions to re-establish military rule in the traditions of President Mubarak. There was no doubt that such intention also had the support among a substantial number of the masses. However, it was far from what the propagandist of the regime said it was; that it had support of the entire masses. That fact was borne out from the number that turned out to vote for the Field Marshal. The regime had promised a voter turn out of nearly 80%. The eventual turnout was about half of that. There were also reasons to suspect that the actual turn out was even less as many election booths were found empty on Election Day. International observers have also cast doubts on the elections credibility.
What has happened in Egypt is a counter-revolution. The democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt as expressed through the Tahrir Square revolution over 3 years ago has turned a full circle and power has once again gone to the very military that was overthrown by that revolution. The ease with which the military has re-established itself after an initial period of serious efforts of the MB to fight it has led many to write obituaries of the MB. An op-ed that appeared in the NYT of May 23, 2014 entitled “ The Muslim Brotherhood Will Be Back” however reminded those making such conclusions that such obituaries were written about it in the past too but were proven to be untrue. In 1963, Manfred Halpern, a noted Political Scientist, had written, “ secular nationalism had triumphed over political Islam.”
Today, the MB’s opponents are again claiming that the ouster of Mohammad Morsi was not that of a man but of a “world view” that Islam and democracy are not compatible. The NYT editorial pointed at the error of such a viewpoint by stating that the truth was in fact the reverse. It called the claim of MB’s opponent “an odd claim considering that it was the democratically elected Mr. Morsi who was overthrown by the army and not the other way around.” The NYT op-ed espoused the concept and cause of illiberal democracy; the need to accommodate regimes as democratic even where they do not fit into the western prescription that democracy and liberalism are complimentary and are inseparable.
In Egypt and in many countries of the world, regimes elected freely; and fairly and reflecting popular will have found it difficult to live up to liberal democracy. The problem of Islamist parties like the MB is even a more difficult one; they find they cannot “ fully express their Islamism in a strictly secular state.” Alternatively, if Islamist parties were to give up their Islamism “then this runs counter to the essence of democracy — the notion that governments should be responsive to, or at least accommodate, public preferences.” The problems of trying to resolve such illiberalism in democratically elected Islamic regimes by military coup d’état are huge; they could push such Islamist parties under ground and bring with it related consequences and dangers.
Nevertheless, the NYT op-ed has predicted that the assumption of power by Field Marshal Sisi would not in anyway be the end of the MB. Instead, the MB would be lurking in the wings as it had done in the past and waiting for democratic openings “ready to return to political prominence, and perhaps even power.” Therefore, the NYT op-ed concludes that the lesson of the Arab Spring is not that “Islamist parties are inimical to democracy, but that democracy, or even a semblance of it, is impossible without them.”
The writer is a retired career Ambassador and his email id is HYPERLINK "mailto:ambserajulislam@gmail.com" ambserajulislam@gmail.com
The new strongman of Egypt has chosen for himself the title that his illustrious predecessors did not have. Gamal Abdel Nasser was merely a Colonel, while Hosne Mubarak was a General. The new President of Egypt has the title of a Field Marshal. In the presidential run-off, he won 96.91% of the votes leaving nothing practically for his poor opponent. Only 47% of the voters turned out on Election Day compared to the 52% that had turned out when Egypt had its last presidential elections two years ago that had elected Dr. Mohammad Morsi as the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 2005, when Egypt had its first direct presidential election, Hosne Mubarak had polled 88.6% of the 22.9% of voters that had turned out to vote.
The way Dr. Morsi was ousted is history. There was of course a lot that had gone wrong in the 13 months the MB had been in power in democratic Egypt. The MB was in a hurry to implement its Islamists agenda. They way it hurried through the drafting and implementing the new Constitution of Egypt without due consultations with the other groups in society and parliament was a grave error. It instantly and rightly upset the secular forces in the country that had been instrumental in bringing down the dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
The equally serious mistake of the Muslim Brotherhood was its failure to consider that although it had won both the parliamentary and presidential elections, it was not the majority in the society and the country. It had failed to realize that there was no way that its Islamic fundamentalist agenda would be accepted without compromise with the secular forces whose role in the “Arab Spring” was more significant than its own. During its short hold on power, the MB government had also indulged in acts of persecution against its political opponents and minorities similar to those committed during the military dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
Nevertheless, its mistakes notwithstanding, the MB had earned the right to rule and legislate the affairs of the country democratically. Therefore, the way the elected President Dr. Mohammad Morsi was removed and the legislature dissolved were also a denial of democracy and democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt. The persecution of MB supporters by the military regime of FM Sisi surpassed those by the regime of Hosne Mubarak on its opponents. Two instances of persecution of MB supporters were unbelievable. In March, the military backed Egyptian court sentenced 529 MB supporters to death for attacking a police station where many who were sentenced were not even present and many were not even members of the MB. In April, the court sentenced 683 MB supporters including some leaders of the party to death for killing one policeman!
These two cases stand out as unique instances in history where so many individuals had been sentenced in a court for killing just one individual; a policeman! Nevertheless, these instances also underlined the determination of the military rulers of Egypt to exterminate the MB for good. There was no doubt that the type of rule that Field Marshal Abdel Fatah el Sisi promised Egypt was welcomed by many who were fed up with the long period of instability following the downfall of General Mubarak that had a disastrous impact on the country’s economy. The Field Marshal was in fact brought to power by the very forces that had ousted the regime of Hosne Mubarak in the wake of Arab Spring, minus the MB that had supported that movement from the outside that had dissuaded the Americans from calling the take over by FM Sisi (then a General) a coup d’état.
Nevertheless, the take over turned out to be more than a mere coup d’état. The regime made no attempts to hide its intentions to re-establish military rule in the traditions of President Mubarak. There was no doubt that such intention also had the support among a substantial number of the masses. However, it was far from what the propagandist of the regime said it was; that it had support of the entire masses. That fact was borne out from the number that turned out to vote for the Field Marshal. The regime had promised a voter turn out of nearly 80%. The eventual turnout was about half of that. There were also reasons to suspect that the actual turn out was even less as many election booths were found empty on Election Day. International observers have also cast doubts on the elections credibility.
What has happened in Egypt is a counter-revolution. The democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt as expressed through the Tahrir Square revolution over 3 years ago has turned a full circle and power has once again gone to the very military that was overthrown by that revolution. The ease with which the military has re-established itself after an initial period of serious efforts of the MB to fight it has led many to write obituaries of the MB. An op-ed that appeared in the NYT of May 23, 2014 entitled “ The Muslim Brotherhood Will Be Back” however reminded those making such conclusions that such obituaries were written about it in the past too but were proven to be untrue. In 1963, Manfred Halpern, a noted Political Scientist, had written, “ secular nationalism had triumphed over political Islam.”
Today, the MB’s opponents are again claiming that the ouster of Mohammad Morsi was not that of a man but of a “world view” that Islam and democracy are not compatible. The NYT editorial pointed at the error of such a viewpoint by stating that the truth was in fact the reverse. It called the claim of MB’s opponent “an odd claim considering that it was the democratically elected Mr. Morsi who was overthrown by the army and not the other way around.” The NYT op-ed espoused the concept and cause of illiberal democracy; the need to accommodate regimes as democratic even where they do not fit into the western prescription that democracy and liberalism are complimentary and are inseparable.
In Egypt and in many countries of the world, regimes elected freely; and fairly and reflecting popular will have found it difficult to live up to liberal democracy. The problem of Islamist parties like the MB is even a more difficult one; they find they cannot “ fully express their Islamism in a strictly secular state.” Alternatively, if Islamist parties were to give up their Islamism “then this runs counter to the essence of democracy — the notion that governments should be responsive to, or at least accommodate, public preferences.” The problems of trying to resolve such illiberalism in democratically elected Islamic regimes by military coup d’état are huge; they could push such Islamist parties under ground and bring with it related consequences and dangers.
Nevertheless, the NYT op-ed has predicted that the assumption of power by Field Marshal Sisi would not in anyway be the end of the MB. Instead, the MB would be lurking in the wings as it had done in the past and waiting for democratic openings “ready to return to political prominence, and perhaps even power.” Therefore, the NYT op-ed concludes that the lesson of the Arab Spring is not that “Islamist parties are inimical to democracy, but that democracy, or even a semblance of it, is impossible without them.”
The writer is a retired career Ambassador and his email id is HYPERLINK "mailto:ambserajulislam@gmail.com" ambserajulislam@gmail.com
Egypt’s presidential election: A counter-revolution
 | M. Serajul Islam |
The new strongman of Egypt has chosen for himself the title that his illustrious predecessors did not have. Gamal Abdel Nasser was merely a Colonel, while Hosne Mubarak was a General. The new President of Egypt has the title of a Field Marshal. In the presidential run-off, he won 96.91% of the votes leaving nothing practically for his poor opponent. Only 47% of the voters turned out on Election Day compared to the 52% that had turned out when Egypt had its last presidential elections two years ago that had elected Dr. Mohammad Morsi as the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 2005, when Egypt had its first direct presidential election, Hosne Mubarak had polled 88.6% of the 22.9% of voters that had turned out to vote.
The way Dr. Morsi was ousted is history. There was of course a lot that had gone wrong in the 13 months the MB had been in power in democratic Egypt. The MB was in a hurry to implement its Islamists agenda. They way it hurried through the drafting and implementing the new Constitution of Egypt without due consultations with the other groups in society and parliament was a grave error. It instantly and rightly upset the secular forces in the country that had been instrumental in bringing down the dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
The equally serious mistake of the Muslim Brotherhood was its failure to consider that although it had won both the parliamentary and presidential elections, it was not the majority in the society and the country. It had failed to realize that there was no way that its Islamic fundamentalist agenda would be accepted without compromise with the secular forces whose role in the “Arab Spring” was more significant than its own. During its short hold on power, the MB government had also indulged in acts of persecution against its political opponents and minorities similar to those committed during the military dictatorship of President Hosne Mubarak.
Nevertheless, its mistakes notwithstanding, the MB had earned the right to rule and legislate the affairs of the country democratically. Therefore, the way the elected President Dr. Mohammad Morsi was removed and the legislature dissolved were also a denial of democracy and democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt. The persecution of MB supporters by the military regime of FM Sisi surpassed those by the regime of Hosne Mubarak on its opponents. Two instances of persecution of MB supporters were unbelievable. In March, the military backed Egyptian court sentenced 529 MB supporters to death for attacking a police station where many who were sentenced were not even present and many were not even members of the MB. In April, the court sentenced 683 MB supporters including some leaders of the party to death for killing one policeman!
These two cases stand out as unique instances in history where so many individuals had been sentenced in a court for killing just one individual; a policeman! Nevertheless, these instances also underlined the determination of the military rulers of Egypt to exterminate the MB for good. There was no doubt that the type of rule that Field Marshal Abdel Fatah el Sisi promised Egypt was welcomed by many who were fed up with the long period of instability following the downfall of General Mubarak that had a disastrous impact on the country’s economy. The Field Marshal was in fact brought to power by the very forces that had ousted the regime of Hosne Mubarak in the wake of Arab Spring, minus the MB that had supported that movement from the outside that had dissuaded the Americans from calling the take over by FM Sisi (then a General) a coup d’état.
Nevertheless, the take over turned out to be more than a mere coup d’état. The regime made no attempts to hide its intentions to re-establish military rule in the traditions of President Mubarak. There was no doubt that such intention also had the support among a substantial number of the masses. However, it was far from what the propagandist of the regime said it was; that it had support of the entire masses. That fact was borne out from the number that turned out to vote for the Field Marshal. The regime had promised a voter turn out of nearly 80%. The eventual turnout was about half of that. There were also reasons to suspect that the actual turn out was even less as many election booths were found empty on Election Day. International observers have also cast doubts on the elections credibility.
What has happened in Egypt is a counter-revolution. The democratic aspirations of the people of Egypt as expressed through the Tahrir Square revolution over 3 years ago has turned a full circle and power has once again gone to the very military that was overthrown by that revolution. The ease with which the military has re-established itself after an initial period of serious efforts of the MB to fight it has led many to write obituaries of the MB. An op-ed that appeared in the NYT of May 23, 2014 entitled “ The Muslim Brotherhood Will Be Back” however reminded those making such conclusions that such obituaries were written about it in the past too but were proven to be untrue. In 1963, Manfred Halpern, a noted Political Scientist, had written, “ secular nationalism had triumphed over political Islam.”
Today, the MB’s opponents are again claiming that the ouster of Mohammad Morsi was not that of a man but of a “world view” that Islam and democracy are not compatible. The NYT editorial pointed at the error of such a viewpoint by stating that the truth was in fact the reverse. It called the claim of MB’s opponent “an odd claim considering that it was the democratically elected Mr. Morsi who was overthrown by the army and not the other way around.” The NYT op-ed espoused the concept and cause of illiberal democracy; the need to accommodate regimes as democratic even where they do not fit into the western prescription that democracy and liberalism are complimentary and are inseparable.
In Egypt and in many countries of the world, regimes elected freely; and fairly and reflecting popular will have found it difficult to live up to liberal democracy. The problem of Islamist parties like the MB is even a more difficult one; they find they cannot “ fully express their Islamism in a strictly secular state.” Alternatively, if Islamist parties were to give up their Islamism “then this runs counter to the essence of democracy — the notion that governments should be responsive to, or at least accommodate, public preferences.” The problems of trying to resolve such illiberalism in democratically elected Islamic regimes by military coup d’état are huge; they could push such Islamist parties under ground and bring with it related consequences and dangers.
Nevertheless, the NYT op-ed has predicted that the assumption of power by Field Marshal Sisi would not in anyway be the end of the MB. Instead, the MB would be lurking in the wings as it had done in the past and waiting for democratic openings “ready to return to political prominence, and perhaps even power.” Therefore, the NYP op-ed concludes that the lesson of the Arab Spring is not that “Islamist parties are inimical to democracy, but that democracy, or even a semblance of it, is impossible without them.”
The writer is a retired career Ambassador and his email id is HYPERLINK "mailto:ambserajulislam@gmail.com" ambserajulislam@gmail.com - See more at: http://www.daily-sun.com/details_Egypt%EF%BF%BDs-presidential-election:-A-counter-revolution_886_2_5_1_0.html#sthash.nhBJirfG.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment