Gauging the state of the nation

Abdel-Moneim Said navigates a path between conflicting methodologies and mountains of sometimes dubious facts and figures

---

Where is Egypt headed? How can we best characterise the current state of the nation? The two questions are repeatedly asked at Egyptian political forums. In cultural circles, in general, and among the intelligentsia and political elite, in particular, the questions are often accompanied by an array of meaningful looks, facial gestures and bodily gesticulations intended to convey the answer. The most common answer to the first question is to the unknown, while answers to the second range from unpleasant to worse off than ever -- when compared, of course, to the glorious days of the 1960s or, in the minds of some, the venerable pre-1950s epoch. While these questions obsess politicians, intellectuals and media pundits the general public, judging by opinion polls, has other things to think about. These concerns may not be as intellectually stimulating but they are more pressing.

What tends to be overlooked is that the two questions are interrelated. It is impossible to determine where Egypt is headed without an agreed upon method of assessing where it stands at present. So far the method does not extend beyond blanket statements of the sort that suggests only an earthquake, or some equivalent upheaval, could remedy Egypt's current condition. True, there is a minority that adopts the "glass is not half empty, but half full" take on the situation but they go no further, never assessing the relationship between the empty and full halves, which may or may not reflect the characteristics of oil and water. From no quarter does one hear specific indicators or scales for measuring the actual nature and magnitude of the problems. There are only sweeping judgements, personal impressions, immutable stereotypes and assorted unscientific generalities, none of which helps very much in determining what is positive or negative at a specific point in time and in accordance with set standards or benchmarks. This applies as much to assessing progress, or its lack, in political and economic reform as it does to gauging the state of human development, of the knowledge of society, of human rights, civil liberties, freedom of the press and of religion.

If the task of discerning the future of Egypt starts from the acknowledgement that all Egyptians, rulers and ruled, elites and masses, are partners in shaping this future (in so far that this is a man-made product) then there must be some agreed upon way to measure and to understand the internal mechanisms of progress. But the task also requires, from the outset, no small degree of sincerity, intellectual integrity and conscientiousness. Frankly, it is high time Egypt's political and intellectual elites realised that snap judgements and uncritically accepted hearsay are no way forward. Only an openness to solid and well- corroborated information, whether or not it comes as welcome news, will lead to a more accurate assessment of the state of Egypt.

Egypt's victory in the Africa Cup of Nations saw the national soccer team move to tenth position in the FIFA World Rankings. In its most recent list, published on the Fédération Internationale de Football Association's website, Egypt was placed after Spain, Brazil, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Germany, France, Argentina and England. In the previous month's list Egypt ranked 24th, which is to say it has jumped 14 positions, leapfrogging some long- established national teams Mexico and Croatia. The Egyptian team now stands miles ahead of any other Arab national football team, the closest being Algeria, at 31. It is also the highest ranked African team, followed by Nigeria in 15th place.

The news triggered a spate of commentary in the Egyptian press to the effect that such promotion up the rankings was an exception to the general rule. After all, the commentators noted, we have yet to make any similarly tangible progress in political reform, rates of economic growth, foreign investment, the influx of tourists, cultural production or other areas of the developmental arena. That this defied the positive correlation between overall progress and progress in a specific domain was shrugged off with the nod in the direction of the notion that life in Egypt is full of exceptions, the suggestion being that once in a while some people manage to break through the net and create a few isolated islands of progress.

What we should take as our starting point is the fact that the strength any country is based on a set of basic components that can be mobilised towards securing national interests. Prime among these components are size and location, demographic composition, natural resources, economic capacity, military strength and technological infrastructure, as well as the quality of leadership and public morale. Development and modernisation are not the sole responsibility of governments; they are also the responsibility of the people. It follows that when a culture of participation is instilled in every individual people become partners in steering the process of change and development. Applied to Egypt, this means our national team's Africa Cup victory is not an exception but the sign of a comprehensive and ongoing process driven by a spirit of competition and excellence.

Unfortunately, the socio-cultural system in Egypt is resistant to the very factors that drive competition. The prevalent social contract between the state and its citizens offers no scope for the latter to compete freely in an open political or economic market. It is founded instead on the state's right to manage a relationship the balance of which is fixed by the citizen's allegiance to the state. This longstanding social contract was a formula for total passivity on the part of the citizen when the state took care of everything. The government made budgetary allocations for education, economic growth, job creation and healthcare, and it organised the various ways in which society moved. A government responsible for the citizen from the cradle to the grave does not create citizens with the will and wherewithal to compete or a social, political and economic environment in which they can thrive.

Processes of measuring the state of the nation cannot be viewed in a vacuum, independent of the prevailing political and economic culture or the part elites play in supporting that culture. With respect to this latter dimension, our political and cultural elites tend always to prioritise the group over the individual and, sometimes, the Arab or Islamic "nation" over the state. They are inclined to regard Egypt as unique, as if it is in thrall to its own laws of nature instead of being part of the process of global evolution.

Sometimes the solution to the problems of measuring the condition of Egypt is to rely entirely on international reports. There are some very rigorous studies produced by international bodies such as the UNDP, the World Bank, the IMF, UNESCO and UNCTAD. The relatively reliable information they provide explains why government bodies here and abroad take a close interest in the data and statistics contained in these reports and the conclusions they contain. Among the most valuable, as far as assessing the state of the nation is concerned, are the International Human Development Report, the State of the World Population Report and the World Health Report. In addition, there are periodic reports produced by such non-government organisations as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Reporters without Borders and the World Economic Forum, which publishes the Arab Competitiveness report. Often these reports are used as references in studies. They may even play a part in the formulation of policies. One of the most useful aspects of these reports is that they provide a clear and well-substantiated idea of how a country stands, regionally or internationally, on a particular subject of concern, and one can be confident that as a country moves up on down on the scales from one annual report to the next, the shift is based on systematically applied criteria.

None of which is to say that there do not exist research centres in the West that perform political functions behind their academic gloss. Prime among these are the US-based Heritage Institute and Freedom House, which can barely conceal their political and ideological biases and agendas. Reports from these agencies often fail to probe the specifics of a particular case or furnish well-balanced, contextualised analyses. They tend to be very selective in the information they use, deriving their facts, figures and opinions from foreign sources that may be ill- informed, or from exiles or dissidents abroad with strong biases of their own.

In general, the state of Egypt in terms of development is not special or exceptional. We get a pretty clear idea of how it stands vis-à-vis other countries in the region or elsewhere on the basis of quantitative and qualitative indices that are useful in identifying exactly where Egypt has progressed, even if overall progress is partial or insufficient to yield a significant change in overall rankings. In UNDP human development reports, the state of education, for example, is gauged on the basis of the adult, ie over 15, literacy rate, school enrolment rates, and a breakdown of enrolment according to educational level or private versus public schooling. The state of health in a country is determined by factors such as life expectancy, accessibility to clean water, the number of doctors per 10,000 inhabitants, the number of nurses per 10,000 inhabitants, the number of health units per 100,000 inhabitants, infant mortality ratios (per 1,000 live births) and the maternal mortality ratio (per 100,000 live births). Indicators used to measure the state of the economy include per capita GDP, economic growth rates, measures aimed at inducing foreign investment, advancements in anti-poverty actions, the poverty and the extreme poverty rates, the unemployment rate, as an overall index and as broken down according to rural and urban prevalence and according to age bracket and educational level). The state of production is gauged by the ratios of the available labour force (persons over the age of 15) engaged in agricultural, industrial, commercial and service sectors.

Some international economic reports observe that although Egypt has made progress in attracting foreign investment, the volume is not sufficient to make a qualitative difference. In 2007 and 2008 foreign investment in Egypt had risen from several million dollars to $13 billion. In 2009 investment dropped to $8 billion. This pales when compared to Vietnam, where foreign investment soared from next to nothing two decades ago to $63 billion last year. On the other hand, reports observe major advances in communications technology and the shift towards the knowledge society, based on the rising figures of ownership of desktop and laptop computers, mobile and ordinary telephones, satellite dishes and Internet use, all of which one senses tangibly in daily interactions, in the types of services offered and in the general social and commercial environment. In addition, international reports note improvements in human development, especially reproductive healthcare, reflected in sharp declines in infant and maternal mortality rates. In 1980 Egypt had one of the worst infant mortality rates in the world, equivalent to that in Ethiopia in 2007. This year, Egypt will rank in the neighbourhood of Sweden, demonstrating that it is definitely moving in the right direction in this area. Successive UNDP human development reports also register marked reductions over the past decade in all areas of human deprivation, apart from unemployment. On the other hand, these reports, as well as those of the World Bank, underscored sharp disparities in human development within Egypt, between urban and rural areas and between Upper and Lower Egypt.

Assessing the condition of Egypt is a relative business, involving comparisons between the past and present, between Egypt and other countries and between one part of the country and another. It will take closer and more exhaustive studies in order to determine where we lag behind and why and where we have succeeded. One of our foremost priorities, in this regard, should be to measure the state of our administrative bureaucracies and their internal regulations, for bureaucratic mazes and red tape continue to hamper performance and progress in many domains. This is an area in which loyalty, seniority and connections continue to outweigh performance when it comes to appointments and promotions. A warning, however: no amount of research and study will help until we are ready to discuss things rationally and intelligently, without demagoguery and sensationalism. Once we are, we will be able not only to chart the future direction Egypt will take but identify the part each of us will play in making the future to which we aspire. We will also be able to determine whether we are prepared to pay the price for what we want. After all, it takes more than just voicing the demand that Egypt become as democratically and economically advanced as industrialised countries for it to happen. We have to be ready to make the necessary sacrifices and be willing to change ourselves.