Ouch. The
Egyptian people have chosen the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, Mohammed Morsi,
as their new president. But are we actually seeing a "transition to
democracy" in Egypt? Well...
The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) had recently
suspended the powers of the presidency to control the military and inserted
broad powers for itself. The country's highest court had thrown out legislative
election results and the new constitution. The SCAF was the true guiding hand
in Egypt for the past year, so why did the Brotherhood candidate win over the
man who seemed to be the natural fit for the military, Ahmed Safik?
Safik was a former prime minister for Hosni Mubarak. He was
seen as the status quo, "old guard" candidate. The Brotherhood had
been banned from political activities under Mubarak. So many questions come out
of this:
Does the Brotherhood have more influence in the military
than most think?
What type of constitution will come out of a
Brotherhood-dominated legislature, assuming there is one (though it seems clear
that's the path the people are headed down)?
What of relations with Israel and the United States, as well
as the broader Middle East region (specifically Turkey, Syria and Iran)?
Will the fundamentalist Brotherhood be able to contain
itself from onerous religious laws after the celebrations in Tahrir Square die
down?
Was there a deal cut between the Brotherhood and SCAF
(obviously, yes)? How extensive was it (besides the military's suspension of
basic democratic controls). Closely connected to this is:
Was this result a fait accompli as the military and the
Brotherhood negotiated "power sharing" roles? (In order to win the
presidency, the Brotherhood had to agree to give up power over the military and
the military would support Morsi).
Politics is politics wherever you go and politics is about
power (getting it, holding it, maintaining it, expanding it, etc.). So all of
the great chants about democracy and freedom will often be a mask to cover
naked power grabs. If the Egyptian military is/was more concerned about power,
than national security, then this result is not surprising. Same goes for the
Brotherhood; give up some powers in the hopes of gaining others they may find
more important (religious, social control). Heck, if the Brotherhood plays
their cards right, they may be able to get the upper hand on the military over
time. Come to think of it, both sides are probably thinking the same thing
(make the deal, wait out the clock, maneuver incessantly and take total
control).
The thought of a large and powerful military, working along
side a known religious fundamentalist group in a (soon-to-be formerly) secular
and open society should give our government and many of the freedom and
liberty-loving people around the world pause. No need to get hysterical just
yet, but watch and wait. I don't see much good coming out of this development...
No comments:
Post a Comment