Business axis

By Salama A Salama

---

Much has been said about the marriage of business and politics in Egypt. Businessmen are increasingly venturing into the People's Assembly and the Shura Council and taking control of newspapers and television networks.

For the first time -- perhaps in the entire history of Egypt -- the cabinet is made up mostly of businessmen who, due to their political and executive positions, are influencing laws, drawing up economic and social programmes, and deciding national policy. It is possible to argue that much of the behind-the-scene machinations that preceded the recent constitutional amendments involved pressure by the government-business axis. This axis is obviously inspired by common interests, for businessmen were not known to have much interest in politics, public affairs, or good governance in the past.

The alliance between government and business is what inspires the way the National Democratic Party (NDP) chooses its candidates for the People's Assembly and the Shura Council. More often than not, the candidates are well-known businessmen, powerful real estate speculators, and major contractors. Such people are chosen not because they are politically adept, civic-minded, or eager to work for the public good, but because they have money. Many NDP candidates have no previous experience within the party, or even a track record of involvement in public life. As a result, the level of parliamentary performance has dipped, and parliamentarians use the bulk of their time to broker business deals.

The alliance of power and money is not the only alliance we need to worry about. There is another going on, one between the authorities and a group of intellectuals, academics and functionaries who place themselves at the disposal of the regime. We have experts whose only concern is to bend the laws and manufacture ideas for the benefit of the ruling party. We have people whose aim is not to promote the interests of the country as a whole, but to make life easier for the authorities. These individuals justify legal amendments, look for loopholes, and generally put a veneer of legitimacy on anything the government wants. They spend their time behind closed doors, thinking of ways to market any given policy, and then leaking the news to their friends in the media, to journalists whose only asset is their loyalty to the powers that be.

Where does one stand on such matters? What can the intellectuals do? And how can anyone with an ounce of conscience survive in such a climate? Should we expect people to remain independent in their thinking and attitude, or to become subservient to authority? Should we expect people to speak their mind, or say only things that please their superiors? Should we expect people to have integrity, or do the things that put food on their table? Under the current climate of political and social turmoil, integrity is at a premium.

This is not a new dilemma; neither for writers and artists nor anyone. With each passing generation, the questions are posed anew. Right now, the gap between the state and the intellectuals is widening by the day. Even the judges, doctors and university professors -- people who have always steered clear of politics -- are being drawn into the mess. It is becoming increasingly difficult to remain neutral. Either one sells out and hops onto the bandwagon of the authorities, or one keeps one's integrity and swims against the current.

People wonder why debate has become such a violent affair. People wonder why criticism has become so caustic and judgement so brutal. But what else do you expect? At a time when the elite is so divided and democracy so fleeting, reason becomes a luxury.