Certainly not

New thinking? Amin Howeidy* is hard pressed to find any evidence to support the NDPs new mantra

---

The National Democratic Party (NDP) has adopted "new thinking" as its motto. I like it, though I am not a member of the NDP, or of any other party for that matter. And I like to think that I may have contributed to the adoption of the phrase. The NDP, particularly the esoteric Policies Committee, once proclaimed "new generation" as its motto. In response I wrote an article in Al-Ahram (22 July 2003) entitled "New generation, or new thinking?"

In that article I argued that "new ideas are not a monopoly of new generations. New ideas exist in every generation." I concluded by writing that "thinking should come first and the ability to implement it second. This is what matters." Immediately afterwards the "new generation" was replaced by "new thinking" and it is a much better slogan if you ask me. But nations do not live by mottos, however good they are. Ideas must be turned into plans and programmes with a sensible timetable. Ideas that don't inspire action are redundant.

When the NDP changed its motto I started following its progress and was disappointed. Nothing was happening, not even during the NDP congress. Sitting in front of the television I saw NDP officials recycling outstanding issues, even ones that have been, and still are, controversial. The policies they debated seemed to focus on the state and its responsibilities. And they seemed to have already made up their minds about the way ahead. They are charting a course that appears to ignore the specificity of the Egyptian condition.

The NDP's policy changes come in response to domestic and external factors. Domestically, the public desperately wants to see an end to policies that are well past their sell-by date. Externally, GATT and the WTO are forcefully pressing for the removal of quotas on imports and a reduction in tariffs. Meanwhile the US and the EU are promoting reform across the developing world. Aware that they had to be seen to be taking some kind of action the NDP decided to do something about the economy while doing nothing to alleviate Egypt's political stagnation. Will this be enough to satisfy those who are monitoring our every move? We must wait and see.

I have no objection to the implementation of GATT. Egypt signed the agreement. The deal is done. Nor do I oppose calls by outsiders for reform. This does not constitute interference in domestic affairs. I am not even against imitation, so long as it is sensible. There is always time to move from following to leading. But I would like us to be open about things, for the sake of credibility, if nothing else. Communication is a two-way street, and it is only through communication that we can avoid disaster. We must focus on consolidating the state, not authority. The two are not one and the same thing. The first opens up the vistas of prosperity. The second leads to perdition.

Current government strategy can be summed as follows: restructure the role of the state in the economy (from owner and investor to regulator and observer), end protective measures that blunt the competitive edge of our national industry, allow the private sector to take the lead in managing economic resources and end state interference in price fixing. And that, I think, is more or less it.

Can any of the above be described as new thinking? Not really. They are policies copied from liberal textbooks and they show little concern for local conditions. We seem intent on short-circuiting the transitional periods through which all industrial nations pass, determined to by-pass the period of protectionism that allowed the advanced industrial nations to establish solid production bases and create credible political institutions. Are we getting ahead of ourselves? Do we really want to give the wobbly private sector the responsibility of pulling the anaemic national economy down a long and winding road? Is this a good idea, or are we just desperate to imitate?

Most of our factories are using outdated machinery, from the 1970s if not the 1960s. Half of the factories in new cities are using machinery that is over 20 years old. In the textile industry, which constitutes roughly one-third of our manufacturing base, three out of four machines are outdated.

I believe that our industry needs care and protection before it is left to its own devices or thrown in the ferocious sea of international competition.

The public expects the government to increase production and exports and at the same time reduce taxes. We need a comprehensive investment plan to address the problem of unemployment and reduce the gap between rich and poor. We also need to address corruption, debts and a host of other economic ills. These are serious challenges. Our crisis is such that we need more than mere sleight of hand. We need new. And we need leadership by example.

Sceptics point out that recent economic measures are being implemented with unseemly haste. It is as if they have been pulled out of an operating manual and skimmed over rather than examined. The absence of any political measures is also worrying. The NDP did nothing about the abrogation of emergency laws, the amendment of the constitution, the revision of party laws and the referendum on the president. The haste with which economic measures are being implemented is in stark contrast to the sluggishness of political reform. Birds need two wings to fly. The Shah of Iran tried to fly with one and we all know the story of the Ayatollahs and the Americans.

In The Lexus and the Olive Tree Thomas Friedman advises Egypt to seek faster integration in the global economy. It seems that many agree with his assessment. Yet I remain far from convinced. The rich among us seem to be doing very well indeed, but how about the millions left behind? Carts drawn by donkeys can stop the mighty Lexus. The powerful don't always get right of way.

Henry Kissinger once noted that the problem with US foreign policy is that it is "too American". In other words, the US forgets that what's good for America may not be good for others. And of all people, it was Kissinger who said it.

To sum up, I will pose and answer three questions.

Is what we're witnessing now mere imitation? Yes.

Is a new generation coming up? Maybe.

Are there any signs of new thinking? No, certainly not.

* The writer is a former minister of defence and chief of General Intellegence.