 |
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 9 -15 November 2000 Issue No.507 
| ||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 9 -15 November 2000 Issue No.507
| ||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Books Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Tribes on the move
By Hani Shukrallah
For a long time the Palestinians liked to describe themselves as the "vanguard of the Arab nation." A fighting people, suffering extreme oppression, and with a compelling national cause, tend to get somewhat self-centred. Yet, this side of half a century of Palestinian dispossession, it was yet again a Palestinian stone that was destined to disturb the stagnant waters of Arab political life. There is a new mood out there, and those who ignore it do so at their peril.
It should be clear, nevertheless, that the upheaval is only partly Palestine-focused. The Intifada did provide a backdrop to Egypt's 2000 parliamentary elections, and there is no doubt that in some instances voter behaviour was directly affected by the overwhelming feelings of solidarity it triggered among the Egyptian public. In a beautifully ironic parody of the Hillary Clinton-Rick Lazio fracas over Castro-Arafat handshakes, the secretary-general of the Alexandria chapter of the ruling party (a prominent businessman) got all of 300 votes -- thanks, largely, to his opponents' having widely distributed a photo showing him engaged in an enthusiastic handshake with Barak.
The Intifada's most significant effect has been much less direct, however. In dramatically underlining both the cruelty of oppression and the nobility of resistance, it has inspired. People identify with both. And it so happens that parliamentary elections are taking place in Egypt. Not just any parliamentary elections; judicial supervision, extended for the first time to subsidiary polling stations, has renewed voters' confidence in the worth of their ballot.
They have gone after the NDP. And that, basically, seemed to be the extent of what the level of development of political life in the country would allow -- for the time being. Punishing the ruling party has been the one identifying feature of the 2000 poll. People voted for "NDP independents" (the ruling party's overwhelming parliamentary majority will be decreased but unthreatened), the Muslim Brotherhood and some unlikely opposition candidates; they did not, as far as possible, vote for the official ruling party ticket.
Big ruling party heads went rolling all over the country. "Sure" opposition candidates (widely whispered to be the beneficiaries of "electoral deals" with the NDP) failed, and unlikely candidates, whose parties had fielded for form's sake, won. The Muslim Brothers, outlawed, hounded and battered to the very doors of the polling stations, proved that they remain the country's only real political party -- a compound irony, since the Brothers, who possess no discernible political platform, are essentially an ideological, not a political, grouping.
This is all the more remarkable since the rules of the parliamentary game in Egypt remain firmly in place. Patronage relations and "tribal" loyalties overwhelmingly determine voter behaviour, and this in a highly class-stratified society where actual "tribes" are virtually non-existent. The bulk of candidates view parliament as a site for business, not politics, and voters concur by demanding "services" rather than political platforms from their representatives. "Tribalism" thus performs the vital function of providing a non-political claim by constituents on their parliamentary representative, and through him, on the state. "Tribes," manufactured and arbitrary, are the fundamental form of popular organisation and social solidarity in the country.
Who said "civil society" was weak in Egypt?
The non-correspondence between civil society as it really exists and its ideal form as expressed in contemporary liberal dogma was not the only area where liberal ideologues received a beating in these elections, as indeed in every other test of the liberal credo. The dismal performance of the Wafd Party (notwithstanding its youthful revival on the election's eve) should have been a shattering blow to the liberal belief system. It won't be, of course. Today's liberals are extremely reminiscent of yesterday's Stalinists (not a very difficult proposition in Egypt, since they are often the very same people). The lack of correspondence between the actually existing and the ideal, between theory and reality, is easily shrugged off as exceptionalism; reality does not correspond to the theory because, somehow, it does not correspond to the theory. Tautology is fundamental to all religions; it is, after all, a question of faith.
By all rights, the Wafd should have been -- next to the NDP -- the party of choice in the kind of two-party political system that best exemplifies the liberal ideal. And, let's not fool ourselves, only the Brotherhood can -- in this election -- rightfully complain of government intervention in the poll. In theory, the Wafd had everything going for it. Over a decade of privatisation, structural adjustment and free market economic policies; a discredited ruling party in the midst of economic crisis; liberal and upper class credentials and connections; a new "youthful" and aggressive leadership with populist aspirations (in the one joint opposition party solidarity rally, the Wafd's new leader outbid the hardiest of Islamists and Arab nationalists by calling for 'throwing Israel into the sea'); and a fairly free poll.
As it happens, by the time the final results of the election are announced, the Wafd will most likely have fewer seats in parliament than the combined leftists -- represented by the Tagammu, the Nasserists and a handful of independents. Privatisation, economic liberalisation and rising entrepreneurialism notwithstanding, the state bureaucracy remains the Egyptian bourgeoisie's "organic representative" of choice. The bourgeoisie will compete fiercely, rebel against the bureaucracy's express will; but it will do so for greater -- direct and apolitical -- access to its extremely vital space.
The ruling party, with the "independents" re-joining it in droves, will maintain its overwhelming majority. The Muslim Brothers and a few other Islamists (with a little less than 10 per cent of the parliamentary seats) will be the leading -- if formally unacknowledged -- parliamentary opposition. There will be a few more opposition voices than in the previous parliament and, judging by their composition, they are likely to be more vocal.
Not a great difference, certainly. Debates in the forthcoming parliament promise to be more exciting than they have been for many years; the House's fundamental nature is not, however, about to change. Nevertheless, something new is afoot; change is in the air.
Related stories:
A farewell to apathy
Softening the blow
A new page for the Brotherhood?
Against the odds 2 - 8 November 2000
Election surprises defy pundits 26 Oct. - 1 Nov. 2000
Poll tough on Islamists 19 - 25 October 2000
The Brothers' last sigh? 5 - 11 October 2000
See Elections 2000
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
