George Orwell once said “all
revolutions are failures but they are not all the same failure.” In the Arab
world, Tunisia is struggling to keep its secular traditions while limping
towards democracy. Libya is lawless and fully failed as a state with bleak
future. In Egypt the army continues to control all aspects in the country and
attempts to weaken its stranglehold have had the opposite effect
and made the generals stronger. It’s fair to say this is in direct contradiction to the earlier rosy
dreams of the Egyptian revolution.
Orwell thought that revolutions fail
because the end result is a change of tyrants and not of the regime. Egypt is a
case in point. The Egyptian revolution was a radical repudiation of the status
quo and the path the country was taking. The people of Egypt sought to
challenge the status quo -- the notion that a person was going to be chosen by
his father to inherit the country, not based on political skill or intelligence.
Fueled by staggering corruption, economic inequality and human rights abuses the
youth, equipped by social media, started a revolution.
It’s clear now the Egyptian
revolution failed and instead the army managed to fix the “glitch in the
matrix” and dictatorship is one manipulated presidential election away. We have no constitution, parliament or
president yet we have a judiciary in the back pocket of the generals, a state
media that continues to spread army propaganda and a recently issued decree by
Ministry of Justice that gives the army the right to arrest civilians.
In, Orwell's "Animal
Farm," he describes a failed revolutionary cycle where the animals managed
to rid themselves of their human master but failed to create a world in which
all animals were equal. Why did we in Egypt fall victim to the same vicious
cycle of failed revolutions?
I recall hearing that love is like a shark: Unless it moves
forward, it dies. The same actually is true of revolutions. The Egyptian
revolution instead of moving from one platform of clear demands and
achievements to another lost its way and remained
leaderless. Other factors helped stunt the revolution such as power hungry, shortsighted
and distracted by shiny objects Islamists that managed to run one of the most
dysfunctional parliaments in Egypt’s history, which is not an easy task (although this doesn't justify its arbitrary disbandment by a biased court). External
influences made things more complicated as the U.S. was understandably ensuring its
interests are protected – access to the Suez Canal, maintaining the peace
treaty between Egypt and Israel – and Gulf countries such as Saudi Arabia and
UAE supporting the army and Salafists to ensure the Muslim Brotherhood model
doesn’t succeed.
The Egyptian revolution’s Achilles’ heel however was always
the army. Many theorists, including Crane Brinton, have argued that the role of the army is the key
factor in deciding whether a revolution succeeds or fails. In Egypt and Syria,
the army generals are defending themselves in the face of the people's awakening; only the
methods used are different due to the specific nature of the two countries. In
Egypt the army abandoned Mubarak to (a) protect itself as using brutal force was
not an option given Egypt’s relationship with the U.S., (b) neutralize Gamal Mubarak’s plans for the country where business men started to encroach on
their economic empire and (c) prevent divisions within the army. In Syria
however, the army took another route to protect itself due to the
absence of real U.S. pressure. In other words, having a U.S. ally (Egypt) kill
its citizens by American made weapons will look really bad on CNN while having
a rouge regime (Syria) kill its citizens with Russian weapons doesn’t put the U.S.
Administration under pressure. The Egyptian army was aware of that and acted accordingly, in most cases.
Another sad reality is that the
Egyptian army fully controlled the transition process despite being not supportive
of Egypt’s democratization as they feared the rise of the Islamists and threats
to their own economic empire and unchecked privileges. Many repeated like parrots that the
Muslim Brotherhood is the most organized in Egypt’s politics, which is wrong
as it confused local with national politics that is fully controlled
by the army and its matrix. Yet, the Islamists blinded by greed and ego decided to
strike a deal with the army and throw the revolutionaries and seculars under the bus. A
similar mistake to that committed by the revolutionaries in January 2011 when
they decided to leave Tahrir Square and put their trust in the army.
So do we get another chance to do
it right? On one hand the people are mentally and physically exhausted. They
would not go back to Tahrir to challenge the army and demand real democracy. Also Tahrir lost the Christians who, like in Syria, see more stability
and safety in army led regimes after the fiasco of Islamists in the parliament
and seculars fragmentation. More importantly seculars and revolutionaries need to acknowledge their mistakes and adjust as needed, however all indicators show a lack of reflection on the past to develop a clear vision and agree on a strategy with clear implementation modalities.
Going forward, I expect the army to be in full control with the Muslim Brotherhood trying to forge a modest role (e.g., the current negotiations to have the PM under Shafik from the Brotherhood) and civil disobedience by groups like the Ultras and unions leading to violence and deaths that would alienate the public even more.
Going forward, I expect the army to be in full control with the Muslim Brotherhood trying to forge a modest role (e.g., the current negotiations to have the PM under Shafik from the Brotherhood) and civil disobedience by groups like the Ultras and unions leading to violence and deaths that would alienate the public even more.
Saying that, Egyptian diplomat Tahsin Bashir once said
"Egypt is the only nation-state in the Arab world; the rest are just
tribes with flags." This should give us hope that our homogeneity and the army's fear of
failing the people like the Islamists did over the past year will pressure the army
to introduce incremental reforms, especially on the economic front, and it will
invest in some form of secular infrastructures to counterbalance the power of
the Islamists. However, it's naive to expect the army to do the right thing without being
pressured.
Milton Friedman, American economist, said “I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion, which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.” Our task is clear, let’s work on establishing a political climate of opinion and a grassroot movement to have real presence in rural and urban Egypt that on the long run would have weight to influence the army and its matrix.
Milton Friedman, American economist, said “I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion, which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.” Our task is clear, let’s work on establishing a political climate of opinion and a grassroot movement to have real presence in rural and urban Egypt that on the long run would have weight to influence the army and its matrix.
