Tunisians and Egyptians have brought down two dictators through non-violent resistance. With perseverance, they may also topple the whole regimes of oppression. The question is where do the generals (both in the military and government) fit in the growing consciousness in the Arab world about the need for states run by those who obtain legitimacy from the people? The Tunisian military is behaving in a much more professional manner than its Egyptian counterpart. The Tunisian generals refrained from involvement in government, preferring instead to be the guarantor of a smooth transition. The Egyptian generals assisted in securing national installations and may have pressured Mubarak to step down. But now their actions seem to resemble the actions of Nasser in 1952 who established a revolutionary command council and began running the country through public statements until he consolidated civilian and military power (the root of the Mubarak regime). The 2011 generals in Egypt have already committed serious mistakes by reinstating Mubarak ministers and governors. More, instead of addressing the demands of the revolution for changing the political system, they began conducting foreign relations.
The revolutionaries asked the military to take speedy action to dismantle the regime of oppression, by first lifting the emergency law (which has been effectively dismantled by the people) and acknowledging that the old constitution has been nullified by the revolution. The latter step is something the generals need because all their actions thus do not conform to the old constitution. That document stipulates the installation of the speaker of the parliament in the absence of the president. Instead, Omar Suleiman announced that the president handed over authority to the military. The deposed president had no constitutional power to take such action. For all practical purposes, Egypt is now ruled by coup leaders. They are appeasing people by promising democracy and a civilian authority. They have taken measures against some NDP leaders whose corruption is known to the public. The military leaders are playing a game of politics. They are calculating that most Egyptians should now be satisfied with such steps. But these are Egyptians of the old political culture that personalized leadership and politics. Many, if not most, of these Egyptians probably did not partake in demonstrations.
Facing a revolting young population, the aging generals must be recalling the 1950s, when they were young, for clues. But the Egyptians today understand the language of peoplehood, rights, citizenship, institutions and how all this relate to the structure of state power. It is this structure that the January 25 Revolution set out to change. The demise of Mubarak was only the first step. The generals are hoping the people would revert to the old ways now the man they hated is gone. They may be in for a rude awakening this Friday February 18, 2011.
The generals and their interim government have their eyes on restoring normalcy. If this is the new Egypt, many Egyptians wonder, it looks like the old one save one person. The dictator was corrupt and is suspected of having stolen billions from the wealth of his nation. But he did not do the rest of offensive acts that characterized his system of oppression. Many Egyptians feel insulted that Tantawi and Fiqqi are acting as if the revolution has done its job.
Clearly the gap between the people and the remainder of the Mubarak regime remains wide. This Friday, February 18, 2011, may witness another eruption if the High Council of the Armed Forces does not meet a substantive revolutionary demand. Lifting the emergency law would be the easiest to institute.
In the absence of this or other actions, two possibilities are on the horizon: (1) the revolt will be rekindled to bring down the top military brass (many Egyptians think the low ranks and foot soldiers are with the people), or (2) the Egyptians may need another thirty years to develop a political culture that de-personalizes power.
2 comments:
Post a Comment