Senior Fellow
Egypt’s President and Military Struggle Toward Democracy
Tunisia was the spark that ignited the Arab Spring, but the revolts in Egypt immediately after set the fire ablaze. When Egyptians removed former President Hosni Mubarak from power, all eyes were on them. Since then, Egypt has endured through frustration with the military regime and various attempts at progress, marking the beginning of a complex transition.
Since February 2011, Egypt has been under military rule. The country has gone through drafts of a new constitution, as well as the creation and invalidation of a parliament. Meanwhile, several political parties have tried to make their way into the system.
According to Scott Hibbard, a political science professor at DePaul University, the military has done everything it can to sustain power since Mubarak was ousted, nicknaming it “Mubarkism without Mubarak.” He also said that there are several issues still present in Egypt including corruption, a low standard of living and an uneven distribution of wealth.
“Removing Mubarak was the easy part,” he said. “There are these really dire kinds of structural problems that need to be changed.”
“The social and economic problems in that country are really so deep,” Hibbard said. “It’s really unsustainable.”
In an effort to continue the democratic process, Egypt held presidential elections in May and June and put Mohamed Morsi, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, in office. While most Egyptians don’t want an Islamist ruler, according to Hibbard, the Muslim Brotherhood has networks and funding that “gave them an enormous political advantage.”
“A lot of people voted for the Brotherhood simply because they weren’t the military,” he said. “People are already beginning to see that the Islamists aren’t the solution.”
Currently, Egyptian politics are a game of tug-a-war between Morsi and the military. Prior to the elections, said Hibbard, the military disbanded Egypt’s parliament and rewrote the constitution to weaken executive power. Additionally, it gave itself more autonomy.
“There is a genuine competition within the system,” Hibbard said. “It remains to be seen how well it works out.”
Secular forces are still playing an important role in the political landscape. Khairi Abaza, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said another reason for an Islamist winner was the lack of secularist participation. Several of them boycotted the elections, and some claim that they were tailored for an Islamist win, according to Abaza.
Despite the tension between these groups, Abaza said that it’s crucial for them to work together if they hope to achieve a stable democracy. Additionally, he said, any political faction that attempts to hijack the system will be met with resistance.
In July, Morsi demanded that parliament meet regardless of the military’s dismissal. Then, on Sunday, Morsi dismissed two of the country’s military leaders after 16 Egyptian security personal were killed in an attack in north Sinai, Aug. 5. The ousted leaders included Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, the country’s former military chief, who led many of the post-Mubarak reforms.
“When there is freedom of speech, there is freedom of speech for everybody, so we should not be scared,” he explained. “You need to level the political ground to call it free and fair elections.”
However, Abaza emphasized that democracy is a process that can’t happen overnight, particularly in countries that were once ruled by a dictator like Mubarak.
“It’s really hard to get rid of the elements that are in this dictatorship,” he said. “Democracy is the learning of the centrist politics. They are learning by practice.”