Egypt: The End of a Dynastic Republic? By Joachim Paul

Reading time: 4 minutes

Egypt: The End of a Dynastic Republic?

For decades, the Arab countries have been a symbol of stagnation and authoritarian rule. Over the years, the Arab republics that came about through the process of decolonisation have evolved into dynastically ruled military dictatorships not unlike the second type of rule found in the Arab world – monarchies. In Syria, dynastic succession already took place in 2000; in Libya and Egypt, Sayf al Islam Gaddafi and Gamal Mubarak had been preparing for power. Yet, from the very start the campaign of Gamal Mubarak, son of the current president, to run for the presidency in the elections scheduled for the end of 2011 has met with strong resistance.

After 30 years under the rule of Mubarak Sr., an overwhelming majority of Egyptians was unwilling to face further decades of rule by Mubarak Jr. – and that in spite of the fact that Gamal Mubarak and his entourage of young captains of industry were forces for economic development. Starting in 2004, there has been genuine economic reform. The government of Prime Minister Ahmad Nazif, deposed during the widespread protests, had since achieved annual growth of up to 7% and had ushered in reform policies targeting whole sectors of industry and the bizarrely bureaucratic public sector. In 2007, in order to legitimise the reforms, any reference to Socialism was struck from Egypt’s constitution. Even so, the regime was unable to recognise how deep the structural social problems ran that have now, within only six days, brought the regime to the verge of breakdown.

Social marginalisation and hopelessness went along with political repression and arbitrary violence. The ‘System Mubarak’ was based on three decades of emergency laws that were routinely reinstated. Any opposition, any political participation was only permitted, if it did not threaten the system but helped reinforce it through the co-option of small groups. The clearest sign of the nature of the system was the massive manipulation and forging of parliamentary elections, in order to secure a huge majority for Mubarak and his governing National Democratic Party (NDP). During the 2005 elections, the democracy initiative of US President George Bush and pressure from other international actors meant that some sort of opposition had to be granted. The result was that, by means of formally independent candidates, the Muslim Brothers gained 20% of seats in parliament. In November 2010, during the last elections, the US and EU did not even try to exert any pressure to achieve democratic reform. This year, because of flagrant manipulation during the second round of elections, the opposition called for a boycott – with the result that the current parliament is wholly dominated by the governing NDP.

However, Egypt’s brief “political spring” of 2005/2006 stimulated a variety of social initiatives and movements, independent trade unions, professional associations, internet activists, and journalists. All of a sudden, on youtube, one could watch videos produced by young bloggers that clearly showed police violence – and millions did so each month. The public could access websites such as „tortureinegypt“. Cases of extreme police violence were documented online and caused outrage and frustration, such as the brutal rape of a taxi driver at a police station, documented with a mobile phone camera, and photographs of Khaled Said, an internet user killed by police in Alexandria.

In European politics Mubarak’s regime was, above all, seen as guarantor of national and regional stability. In the 1990s, Egyptian security forces managed to quell Islamic insurgencies. The “War on Terror,” a shortsighted and socially blind policy, led to further weapon purchases and brought more political backing. In regional confrontations with Islamic opposition movements Mubarak, and especially his newly appointed vice president and chief of security, Omar Sulaiman, were perceived as key allies. Against this background, the EU was willing to accept flagrant abuses of democratic principles as well as social exclusion without facing up to the long-term destabilising consequences such policies would have.

We do not know what will happen next in Egypt. Still, the EU has to make up its mind now whether it wants to continue with its support for authoritarian Arab regimes and their security forces that, for decades, have prevented the development of their societies by repressive and frequently undemocratic means – or whether they are willing to take the huge wave of protests, the wish for change seriously and back a difficult, possibly chaotic process of democratic change.
 

Joachim Paul