Category Archives: Politics

Egypt, Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Politics, Society

Egypt’s future hangs by a thread…

HOPE

The present situation in Egypt looks grim, both in the wider picture and in the detail.

Tensions in Cairo remain high following the deaths outside the Presidential Guard barracks on Monday, fatalities which included women and children among the dead. The prospect of any government being formed soon looks extremely remote.

Hazem el-Beblawi, the 76-year-old former finance minister, named last week as the interim Prime Minister, has struggled in his task to form a cabinet. That task has been made more difficult due to the issue of arrest warrants by the state prosecutor for senior figures in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Following the removal of Mohammad Morsi, Egypt’s deposed leader, it was suggested that the priority for the interim administration was to form a broad-based coalition government, and one that was reflective of Egypt’s political diversity. President Morsi had not sought allies beyond his immediate supporters, a crucial reason as to why he was removed following millions who had taken to the streets in protest. It can hardly have been helpful, then, that a slew of new arrest warrants was the best way to go about fostering peace and reconciliation. The Brotherhood’s political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party, had already refused to join a unity government – on the not so unreasonable grounds that it had led a democratically elected government that was unlawfully removed.

On Tuesday, the British Foreign Secretary’s statement in the House of Commons highlighted some of the difficulties. Mr Hague has urged Egyptians to move swiftly to hold free and fair elections, as well as working towards openness, democracy and economic reform. Whilst the sound-bites are sensible, they must ring pretty hollow to those Egyptians who thought they already had a freely elected government following the election of Mr Morsi 12-months ago.

Mr Hague also skirted around the uncomfortable fact that the army had seized power and the refusal by some, notably the United States, in referring to the takeover as a coup. The feeling that the Western world promotes and lauds democracy elsewhere, until it produces something they don’t want, will only have been reinforced with what is happening in Egypt.

In the short-to-medium term at least the situation in Egypt seems likely to remain highly problematic. In the unlikely event that all parties and vested interest groups can be persuaded to take part in amending the constitution, approving it in a government-run referendum will undoubtedly leave some to question the authority of any newly formed government – built as it will on the back of an army takeover.

Over the past week, Egypt’s democracy has not been strengthened. Following the carnage on Monday, descent into a Syria-style bloody civil war seemed inevitable. But whilst the confrontation at the Presidential Guard barracks, in which more than 50 people died and dozens of others were injured, it also seemed to shock all sides into stepping back from the brink. It is too soon to be abandoning hope.

Rather than issuing new arrest warrants, the authorities should be exploiting this pause to offer some kind of peace reconciliation – for example, by starting to release detainees.

Egypt’s compelling sense of national identity is a permanent and immovable asset. Unlike many states in the region, it has a common history going back millennia; it has borders that are well defined, and there are no serious challenges from ethnic minority groups. Egypt’s differences are invariably religious and political which, though it doesn’t make them any less sharp, does still leave Egypt’s national identity intact. The interim administration as well as any new government needs to capitalise on this and should provide a roadmap in helping Egypt to complete its revolution.

However untidy Egyptian society has become of late, the taste that many in Egypt have developed over the past two-and-a-half years for freedom and democracy can be a force for good as well as ill. As we have seen it veered all too easily when Mr Morsi was deposed a week ago, into a rule by a discontented mob. Such proof of political engagement, however, could also deter the military from the excesses to which it is prone.

There are slivers of hope for Egypt’s future, but hope is all that is currently on offer.

Standard
Britain, Politics

Labour’s struggle with Unite…

EXPOSING MILIBAND’S WEAKNESS

For Ed Miliband, the Labour Party’s leader in the UK, the last ten days or so have been wretched. Mr Miliband who has been so desperately unimpressive in the past few months, particularly in response to the spending review delivered by George Osborne, now finds himself at the centre of a scandal that exposes his weakness even further.

Mr Miliband would never have guessed that a Westminster barroom brawl involving Falkirk MP Eric Joyce would have had such seismic repercussions.

Mr Joyce decided to stand down and subsequently this has triggered a poisonous battle in who should become the next Labour candidate in this safe Labour seat. The issue is now threatening to engulf the Labour leader, who has never looked so weak, rattled and indecisive.

The first allegations to emerge were that the union Unite – whose block vote was crucial in winning Mr Miliband his job following the departure of Gordon Brown – had swamped the local party constituency with new and unfettered members, so they could vote for the union’s preferred Left-wing candidate.

Worse still, it was then discovered that Unite, led by Len McCluskey, was itself paying the new members’ subscription fees, and in some cases had even signed up people as members without their knowledge. This could lead to a potential criminal act of identity theft.

A strong leader of the Labour Party would have recognised the huge political danger in allowing a militant trade union (which wants Labour to wreck the economy all over again with more spending and more debt) to tighten its already vice-like grip on the party.

It is alleged that, for weeks, Mr Miliband knew about the Falkirk allegations and did nothing. It has taken the deeply suspicious resignation of his election chief Tom Watson, and the revelation that Unite had tried to influence the outcome in a further 40 selection contests elsewhere in the country, to wake him up from this pathetic dithering.

And yet Ed Miliband’s response has been feeble and inadequate.

On Friday, Mr Miliband made much of the fact that he has referred Labour’s internal report into Falkirk to the police. But, in reality, was this not an act of weakness given that 24 hours earlier the Conservative MP Henry Smith had written a public letter to the Chief Constable of Police Scotland calling for a full fraud inquiry?

Mr Miliband who champions the cause of openness and transparency is steadfast in his refusal to make the report public. A string of senior figures, however, has demanded that he do so.

Mr Miliband, who wants to shackle Britain’s free Press with statutory regulation, is a position that is at odds with the openness he calls for. For how would the murky dealings and vote-rigging within his party have surfaced if such a framework had existed? It is likely the shenanigans and underhand dealings of Unite would never have been exposed.

Calling on Mr McCluskey to turn his back on ‘machine politics’, the Labour Party has to answer as to why it has quietly changed the rules by making it a condition that any candidate in a council or Parliamentary election must be a union member (as opposed to should be, which was formerly the case). This was done shortly after Mr Miliband become leader.

Many people will question whether Mr Miliband is in any position to confront Unite and its leadership over its bid to drag Labour back to the bad old days of 1980s militancy. It is certain that if Unite withdrew its financial support of the Labour Party, the party would quickly become inoperable, if not by going bust. Over the past three years alone Unite has given Labour a staggering £8 million.

No wonder then that Labour are unable to commit properly to spending cuts, in fear that Mr McCluskey and his union cronies might not like it.

Standard
Egypt, Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Politics, United States

Egypt’s revolution and the ballot box…

EGYPT MUST COMPLETE ITS REVOLUTION

The events in Egypt led the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, to say that ‘Democratic change is a process, not an event.’ Mr Hague, addressing a Conservative Middle East Council, last week, following the removal of Mohammed Morsi as Egypt’s prime minister, is supported by history with his argument. The revolution that deposed the dictator Hosni Mubarak in 2011 has taken many surprising turns.

Egypt’s election of a president was designed to bring democracy to a country that has been missing for more than 80 years. The democratic legitimacy granted to Mr Morsi, a popular vote of more than 50 per cent at the ballot box just 12 months ago, was a mandate in reshaping the country as an Islamic Republic.

The revolution in Egypt continues following the removal of Mohammed Morsi by the military. But with tensions rising and the Muslim Brotherhood discontent with the democratic process, the revolution that stemmed from the Arab Spring of 2011 is putting democracy in danger.

The revolution in Egypt continues following the removal of Mohammed Morsi by the military. But with tensions rising and the Muslim Brotherhood discontent with the democratic process, the revolution that stemmed from the Arab Spring of 2011 is putting democracy in danger.

But rather than heal the economy or build up secular, civil institutions – a necessary prerequisite given the mix of Secularists, Christians and Muslims in the country – Morsi used his fragile mandate to push through a fundamentalist constitution, while overseeing the country’s descent into anarchy, chaos and economic crisis. The result was that the military stepped in on the pretext of reclaiming the revolution from the country’s democratically elected leader. Whilst its intervention was celebrated by millions who took to the streets, and tens of thousands of people gathered in Tahrir Square, the army’s subsequent actions have been a mix of progressive action and of being troubling. The choice of a civilian judge as interim president suggests that the military’s intentions are good, but it has also started to arrest members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a reflection of the dictatorial authoritarianism of the old Mubarak regime.

President Barack Obama said the new government should ‘avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsi and his supporters’. That is surely right, for there should always be a space for Islamists in a country on the road to reform and democracy. Exclusion would only lead to sectarian violence.

Yet, some analysts have commented that part of the febrile situation in Egypt rests with President Obama, who has sent convoluted and mixed signals: first supporting the 2011 revolution and then remaining neutral. Mirthfully, or as ironic as the situation has become, the lack of US involvement convinced some in the Egyptian opposition that Mr Obama supported President Morsi. In May, the US Secretary of State, John Kerry, expressed dissatisfaction with Egypt’s commitment to democracy, but, just a month later, the United States agreed to give the Egyptian army $1.3 billion in aid.

American law is clear on restricting assistance to any country whose elected head of government has been deposed by a military coup or decree – a legal provision in U.S. statute which has given Mr Obama an opportunity to show some leadership.

Washington has stated that it will withhold the $1.3 billion if the generals are judged to have staged a coup, and it is difficult to draw any other conclusion. But this threat should be used by Mr Obama as leverage to compel the military to commit to elections as soon as possible, preferably with a clear itinerary and timetable attached. That would be the best outcome and a necessary condition if Egypt is to complete its revolution.

Standard