Democracy without democrats
Another sweeping look by Bush at how he would like to see a future Middle East made the Egyptian press livid, writes Omayma Abdel-Latif
US President George Bush's vision for the Middle East -- or rather the lack of it -- as outlined in his speech last week took up acres of space in the press this week.
President Bush's rating of the Arab countries on his scale of democracy has drawn mixed reaction from Egyptian commentators and analysts. While the majority of commentators were dismissive of the speech as yet another piece of rhetoric, some analysts viewed it as a mixed bag where everyone can find something which suits their interpretation. Some pro-government commentators sought to focus on the parts of the speech which referred to Egypt and to interpret them as "heaping praise" on the state's reform process. Other independent and opposition writers, however, cited it as yet another example of the continuous US attempts to meddle in the internal affairs of the countries of the region.
Al-Wafd newspaper, mouthpiece of the liberal Wafd Party, derided Bush's speech on its front page on 8 November, stating that "the Arab street rejects democracy a la Bush."
"He [Bush] should set an example by transferring power from Iraq's US-controlled administration to the Iraqi people... Bush cannot be trusted because of his blind and unjust support for Israel and the occupation of Iraq, the two factors which discredit his call for democratisation and, in fact, any association with him would undoubtedly undermine the position of the real democrats in the Middle East," the paper noted.
In the same issue, writer Salah Eissa expressed scepticism about Bush's promise to right an old wrong. "It's all well and good that the US president acknowledged that his country had committed a mistake by its support of despotic regimes in the Middle East for the past 60 years but it would have been much better if he had promised to cease such practices," Eissa wrote.
Echoing the same opinion, albeit in a harsher tone, Mustafa Bakri, editor of the independent Al-Osbou' wrote his take on Bush's speech in the form of a letter addressed to the American president. Under the headline, "A letter to President Bush", Bakri wrote:
"Mr President, you have no right to speak about democracy and reforms in the Arab world because the Arab people did not delegate you to speak on their behalf. We have no qualms to declare outright and loud and clear that we do not want your democracy and we do not accept your meddling in our internal affairs." Bakri also had some words for the rulers in the Arab world. "Stop monopolising power, don't allow any attempts at interference by the US and reconsider your relationship with the United States because it is your people and not the US which will protect you."
Again, the editorial of Ibrahim Se'da of Akhbar Al-Yom, a pro-government publication, slammed Bush's speech. Titled "President Bush, the democrat", Se'da's piece strongly criticised what he described as "Bush's attempts to delude the Arab people first by his roadmap and now by claiming to want to promote democracy.
"If some people in Egypt call for more democratic rule, then this is their legitimate right to do so in a country that allows freedom of opinion. But those who call for democracy will not be content at all to have others interfere in their internal affairs, particularly if that 'other' is US President George Bush who promises what cannot be implemented and who deluded his own people before deluding others. The Arab people do not need Bush's democracy which he is creatively and miraculously implementing now in a brotherly country -- Iraq," wrote Se'da.
It was not, however, all gloom and doom for Bush's vision of democracy in the Middle East. Rose Al-Youssef magazine, a pro-government weekly, put a positive spin on Bush's speech by offering a far more optimistic reading. "Despite the fact that the words were few, they emphasised the leading role of Egypt. For it alone has led the way to peace in the entire region and it alone can lead the way to democracy. This is exactly what Egypt has been doing since President Mubarak took office in 1981," the magazine observed. The magazine's senior commentator Karam Gabr added that the reference to Egypt was an acknowledgment of the steps taken by the Egyptian leadership on the road to political reform. "One can safely say that the main points in the speech are encouraging and a cause for relief. More importantly is to follow through by translating strategy into action and steering clear of language that threatens to use force to overthrow regimes or replace them."
Another topic which the papers continued to take issue with was political reform in Egypt. Sawt Al-Umma continued its anti-government campaign and while last week it called on Prime Minister Atef Ebeid to resign, this week the paper's editor Adel Hammouda sought to take the discussion to a higher level by outlining an exit strategy for the government. Headlined "Egypt awaits change", Hammouda's article suggested a reform package that would begin by the formation of a national government, to be followed by putting corrupt ministers on trial; introducing constitutional amendments to the way the president is elected; granting a bigger role for the opposition where emphasis would be placed on platforms, not on individuals; and abolishing the emergency laws.
"The opposition has serious doubts about the NDP's [National Democratic Party] true intentions regarding a dialogue because it believes that the party will not give up one inch of power. Meanwhile, the NDP knows that the opposition is divided and ready to make compromises and concessions simply because every opposition party has been reduced to one individual: the chairman of the party. I had hoped that the NDP would have conducted an internal dialogue before it initiated a dialogue with other parties because the party is torn between a young new group that exerts effort to understand, think and change and another group which insists on manoeuvering in order to maintain the status quo. This latter group is capable of destroying any attempt at reform." The group, according to Hammouda, has rendered the whole process of political reform "futile and no more than an exercise in propaganda".
In fact, news coverage of the national dialogue was reduced to just two items this week; one in the pro-government daily Al-Gomhuria which reported that NDP officials were due to hold talks with the heads of the Umma Party and the Democratic Unionist Party during the week as part of the national dialogue process. Al-Ahram also reported that President Mubarak was due to review a report on the national dialogue this week to decide on the future steps to be taken.
The People's Assembly is in for a minor reshuffle, Al-Wafd reported this week. As the assembly reconvenes this week to begin its 124th parliamentary session, it will vote to drop the membership of 15 MPs who have been disqualified by court order as draft-dodgers. Al-Wafd reported that elections are due to be held next month after the assembly had notified the Interior Ministry that constituents are almost non-existent.
Another kind of election, for the student unions in national universities, is due to be held this month. Al-Wafd reported that preparations for the voting were well under way.
The iftar gathering -- during which time the fast is broken in the month of Ramadan -- that the Muslim Brotherhood organised last week at a five-star hotel in Heliopolis and which was attended by several prominent figures from across the political spectrum, was totally ignored by most newspapers except Al-Arabi, the mouthpiece of the Nassrist Party. On its front page, the paper quoted Milad Hanna, an Egyptian Coptic thinker who attended the iftar, as urging President Mubarak "not to run for a fifth term in office". The paper described the gathering as "a session that was meant to put the regime on trial".
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 13 - 19 November 2003 (Issue No. 664)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/664/pr1.htm