Egypt’s Arab Spring sprung early last winter. That was eight months ago. That’s when the Egyptian military ousted long-time President Hosni Mubarak. The voice of the Egyptian people had been heard. Democracy was distantly visible on the Egyptian horizon. The reins of government would be held –but on an interim basis only- by the Egyptian military. That military was widely and favorably viewed as the protector of Egyptian stability. Timely elections were to be held. A new Constitution was to be promulgated. Fresh spring air was seemingly wafting through Cairo’s Tahrir Square.
But wait. Not so fast. That fresh spring air was –and is – polluted. In fact, with Mubarak gone, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and its head, Field Marshall Tantawi, assumed absolute control. Contrary to fond expectations, very little has changed.
In March, with Mubarak’s ouster still fresh, the Egyptian military arrested, tried and sentenced Maikel Nabil Sanad to three years in prison. Maikel was a young, dissident blogger. His crime was that he had posted an article criticizing the military’s role in the Egyptian revolution. Maikel had argued that the military was a nemesis to the protestors. Maikel pulled no punches. He flatly asserted: “The revolution has so far managed to get rid of the dictator, but not the dictatorship!”
Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces deemed Maikel’s comments
to be “a clear transgression of all boundaries of insult and libel.”
More pointedly, dissident bloggers had been routinely imprisoned by Mubarak’s regime. But Maikel’s imprisonment by the SCAF served as an early red flag that even free expression would not be tolerated in Egypt. It was thus that Egypt’s Arab Spring began to be rained out.
That said, Maikel’s travails are also an clear indication that Egypt’s military is not disposed to surrender power any time soon. Indeed, as another dissident Egyptian blogger recently wrote: “The military wants to annihilate anyone who questions what it does.” That blogger -with abundant premeditation - identified himself as “Kafaya Punk” (roughly translated as "The Defiant Punk!").
And so it is that we arrive back in Cairo on 9 October 2011. The scene was yet again one of chaos, confusion and virtual anarchy. But this time, the mood and targets of the mobs were different. For the first time, the military itself was also targeted by demonstrators.
As it happens, the Coptic Church, which claims about 10 percent of Egypt's 83 million people, accused the military of purposely failing control a Moslem mob. The Copts had been peacefully protesting against attacks on their churches. The Moslem mob turned that protest into a violent sectarian riot. Inexplicably, the military somehow failed to prevent the death of about two dozen Coptic Christians.
Indeed, recent months have witnessed an undercurrent of growing disaffection with the military. Anti-military rhetoric has been on the upswing. In fact, disparate groups, upset with the military, had begun denouncing the SCAF for willfully obstructing the Egypt's evolution into
a democracy.
But it was not until October 9th that protestors used weapons against the military. While the identity of those rioters remains unclear, at least one message is clear. The Egyptian military’s image as a neutral arbiter and/or protector of the people has now been called into question.
As the mob scene developed on October 9th, three distinct factions revealed themselves, i.e. the Copts, the Moslems and the military. Arguably, the military sided with neither the Copts or the Moslems. But that perception may be skewed.
It was widely rumored that Copts were attacking soldiers. True or not, that perception catalyzed a Moslem mob into action. Some threateningly chanted: "Islamiyyah, Islamiyyah" (only an Islamic state!). Simultaneously, the military-controlled media conveniently characterized Copts as the primary perpetrators of the riot.
The bottom line of all this is that Egypt remains fractured by a broad spectrum of opposition groups. Each group espouses its own platform, promotes its own self-interested objectives and awaits its own preconceived expectations for the future of Egypt.
The most important, the most self-interested and the group with the most to lose is the Egyptian military. Without question, the military was (under Mubarak) and still is (under the rule of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces) the most critical entity in Egypt. That is true with reference to virtually every aspect of life in Egypt. It is especially true (to no little extent) as to the pregnant issue of whether or not Egypt devolves from a technically secular state into an officially Islamic nation.
Need it be said that Egypt's military establishment has, in many respects, been decidedly astute. For four decades the military was the power behind Mubarak. But, when it served the military’s interests to do so, it simply ousted Mubarak from office. When Tahrir Square exploded with anti-Mubarak demonstrations, the military studiously avoided becoming embroiled in the demonstrations. The military carefully distanced itself from Mubarak’s policies and skillfully portrayed itself as the sole guarantor of Egyptian stability.
It is now crystal clear that the military has out-maneuvered Egypt’s dissidents. Some among latter had high hopes that military rule would only be a transitional bridge to a democratic Egypt. Other dissidents of an Islamist stripe envisioned an Egypt that would –sooner or later – become officially Islamic. But by now both factions must recognize that the Egyptian military may well harbor a third and completely different vision for Egypt’s future.
It is virtually axiomatic –if not also Machiavellian– that preservation of the status quo is the primary aspiration and objective of those in power. Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is in power. It was the power behind Mubarak's Presidency. Furthermore, it seems increasingly clear that the SCAF has little intention of willingly yielding power to democratic secularists, to the Muslim Brotherhood or to any other aspiring entity of whatever ilk.
What happens next is subject to all manner of speculation. Will the SCAF proceed with the Parliamentary elections scheduled for November 28th? Will the SCAF willingly transfer its power to a democratically elected civilian government? Will the elections be rigged to ensure continued military control?
Additionally, will the SCAF act to keep Egyptian dissidents divided and/or to provoke further discord? Is it in the SCAF's interest to contain or to exacerbate sectarian strife? Will it be a surprise if the SCAF decides that the continuing unrest merits a calculated delay in the path to democracy? Or will the SCAF decide that a growing level of Egyptian dissent is sufficient to simply cancel elections and justify the imposition of emergency rule?
Clearly, the SCAF's reign has already dampened -and may yet completely drench- Egypt's Arab Spring. It is thus that the felonious words of Egypt’s imprisoned dissident blogger now resonate with ever increasing intensity: “The revolution has so far managed to get rid of the dictator, but not the dictatorship!”
So much for the Arab Spring in Egypt!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment