EGYPT: LEARNING THE RIGHT LESSONS
Maryam Sakeenah
The obvious conclusion from Egypt is that political Islam’s
‘concordat’ with democracy has proven a failed experiment. As predicted by
Essam Haddad, ‘the message will resonate
throughout the Muslim world that democracy is not for Muslims.’ The message
has in fact been enthusiastically taken up, with Islamists saying ‘we told you
so.’ An article on one such website states, ‘recent experience in Egypt has once again exposed the reality
of ‘democracy’ and the true face of democracy- worshippers... democracy isn’t
meant for us Muslims.’ The few willing to undertake a deeper and more insightful
analysis of the dynamics of political Islam as unfolded in Egypt and the
greater Middle East are led to conclude that the problem is not democracy but
the lack thereof.
The
problem is with the deeply entrenched secular elite and the powerful
civil-military bureaucracy in the Muslim world that has persistently obstructed
the transition to democracy in order to perpetuate the status quo that sustains
them. The problem is with the regressive mindset of these so-called liberals
whose lust for power and influence holds democracy hostage as they pay
conventional lip service to it, to dupe gullible masses; who laugh the
symbolism of the ballot to scorn, not willing to see through a fledgling
democratic regime for its mandated time. The problem is with these blue eyed
boys of Western powers- that hold a nascent democracy under the thumb; the
problem is with the double standards of Western torchbearers of democracy
complicit in the brutal travesty of democracy in Egypt; who shamelessly use
democracy as a buzzword to legitimize governments servile to the diktat coming
from on high; and to delegitimize those that are not amenable to functioning as
instruments to safeguard their interests. The problem is with using the
pretense of commitment to democracy to disguise a unilateralist pursuit of
political and geostrategic interests in the region. The problem is with
refusing to call a coup by its name so that the new post-Morsi administration
installed by the military could continue to receive assistance from Western
nations so as to guarantee and promote the interests of the players of the
global Great Game for power.
The
heart of the matter and the bitterest lesson is what Patrick Galey has said in
‘The Day the Revolution Died’: ““I’ve
learned a basic and terrifying truth today: That many would rather see a
military junta rule with impunity and autocracy than see a democratic administration
govern with fecklessness and error. That many people who call themselves revolutionaries and advocates
of democracy simply hate Islamism more than they love freedom. That people are
fully prepared to welcome the army back to political life, with a cheer, two
fingers up to those killed since 2011, and a good riddance to Egypt’s first
experiment with democracy.”
The right lesson to learn is that the still embryonic
democratic culture in the Middle East is to be defended against the illiberal,
valueless secular elites and powerful civil-military bureaucracies that pay lip
service to democracy while vying for the maintenance of their own power and
influence with blessings of their foreign mentors. That is why the coup in
Egypt is to be rejected and opposed.
The right lesson for societies in transition is to
create infrastructure salubrious for democratic values and practices to take
root. Democratization of polities is long, arduous and painstaking. Egypt may
be going through the birthpangs of it, but for democracy not to perish in the
throes of its birth, it must not be understood as and confined to a balloting
exercise. State institutions must respectfully stand by to see it through.
Democratic institutions need to tame down and cut to size emboldened militaries
with a history of political intervention and influence. Morsi’s greatest
failure was in not being able to create constitutional checks and balances
against the unwarranted interference of Egypt’s powerful secular military, and
in his ineffective dealing with a variegated and vociferous opposition. Without
such measures to let democracy take root, it will remain on life support with
the ever-present threat of the military boot’s heavy tread stomping the life
out of it. The right lesson is not less but more democratization- social,
economic and political- from the grassroots so that the balloting exercise has
more meaning and the legitimacy of the results it yields, commands respect.
The consequences for political Islam have been graver
still. The Egyptian experiment is a significant let-down for the moderate voice
that had reconciled Islam with democratic practice and had quite monumentally
eked out a way for Islamic regimes to function in a secular-democratic milieu.
It lends strength to the more simplistic thesis easier to draw and hence
enthusiastically embraced by the Islamist: Democracy is the system of the
unbeliever. Through its double standards and complicity with the brutal
military that ousted Egypt’s democratic government, the West has ignored this
far-reaching consequence to its own peril.
But as we resent the hijacking of the popularly voted
Morsi regime in Egypt, we cannot bury our head in the sand when it comes to
Morsi’s fatal mistakes- his all-too-frequent fumbling and blundering that
showed a complete lack of vision and foresight, or even an understanding of the
complex issues he confronted. It was not just ineptitude but spineless,
dim-witted lack of political acumen displayed by the Muslim Brotherhood in both
its advisory and decision making roles. Given the fact that the Brotherhood is
the most well-organized Islamic political group with decades of struggle behind
it, raises an important concern about the development of seasoned, visionary
and pragmatic leadership in the Muslim world. The vital lesson most pressing in
its gravity and urgency is to develop a comprehensive strategy and make a
Herculean effort to chisel such leadership that possesses fidelity to faith and
yet is conversant with modernity, and is poised for mediating between the
polarized extremes in Muslim societies. Iqbal wrote: ‘sabaq phir parh sadaqat
ka, adalat ka, shujaat ka / liya jaye ga tujh se kaam dunya ki imamat ka’
(learn your lessons in integrity, justice and courage; and you shall be chosen
to lead the world) Islamic organizations throughout the length and breadth of
the Muslim world must unifocally devote themselves towards this end.
Events in Egypt also expose the juvenile euphoria over
the Arab Spring and the ‘revolution’ in Egypt. The thrilling, glamorous
buzzword has been opportunistically taken up by the interim regime to describe
the popular movement that called for the ouster of the Morsi regime by the army
under the approving eyes of foreign actors pulling the strings. Students of history are aware that revolutions,
while exciting, electrifying and spectacular are also bloodstained and often in
vain, seldom yielding enduring change. The French revolution was trailed by the
Reign of Terror, and the Russian revolution dwindled into the dictatorship of
Stalin. Lasting change follows a bottom-up trend, rising from the grassroots.
It is engendered through gradual and consistent evolutionary process.
Gradualism is an important insight employed by the Quranic method of social
reform. Groups believing in and calling for revolutionary change to install
Islamist regimes which will- needless to say- involve clash, blood and gore,
are terribly misguided. Such a revolutionary change will rest upon feet of
clay. Those looking all starry- eyed for revolutionary Islamist upheaval must
drop off the ‘r’ to rediscover the more enduring and profound scope of gradual,
evolutionary, phased reform.
A fundamental,
vital lesson less noticed and talked about is that the polarization of Muslim
societies into the religious and the secular is an open-mouthed Hydra waiting
in the wings ominously. This is likely to create wide and irreparable rifts
that will threaten social stability and solidarity and flare up in times of
crisis into clash and confrontation. Few in the Muslim world however have
deciphered this writing on the wall. Egypt’s political showdown stems from its
deeper ideological crisis gnawing into the roots of its body-politic.
Conflicting aspirations of the secular and the religious, exacerbated by the
Salafi extreme with its rigidly conservative agenda and its rejection of Brotherhood
rule lending strength to the secularist-dominated opposition made the country
virtually ungovernable and the weak leadership caved in. This ideological rift
running threateningly like a tectonic faultline through society posed a
formidable challenge to democracy, making the achievement of a consensus over
just about everything, impossible to reach.
Muslim scholars
and leaders are not cognizant of the danger this poses, and in a desperate,
sincere but ill advised attempt to ‘defend’ Islam from the assault of the
powerful secular-liberal lobby, become more insular and exclusivist. This leads
to ghettoization and reinforces, aggravates and intensifies the polarization. It
results in two embattled ideologically opposed camps with strong in-group
solidarity and out-group hostility. This is the much-speculated ‘war within
Islam’ we have often heard mentioned by neoconservatists. Islamists must
realize that given the resourcefulness of their opposition and the backing and
support from powerful Western allies, such a clash will be hard, long-drawn and
ugly. They must learn that by being on the defensive and ghettoizing, they
bring the clash closer, lend strength to the polarization and at the end of the
day the Leviathan monster unleashed is going to swallow us all up,
indiscriminately.
The right lesson
for Islamic leaders is to recognize this danger and actively work to prevent
such an eventuality through education and dissemination of ideas that do not
deepen the rifts but reach out by speaking in a universal, inclusivist voice
that is essentially the ethos of Islam. They must work to engender a
consciousness that is rooted in faith and guided by common values, ready to
take the plunge into the abyss that stares us in the face; ready to take up the
grand project for social reform by infiltrating into the rank and file of a
stratified, broken society- and not under narrow parochial labels and confining
banners of ‘Islamic’ or otherwise. And this is not to be misunderstood as lack
of fidelity to the faith. This will bring the additional advantage of the
struggle for Islam becoming more discreet and elusive in the wake of rising
hostility and even active opposition to and persecution of identifiable
Islamists- in the process taking the struggle out of ghettos into the wider
society, waging it at all levels.
Organizations
like the Muslim Brotherhood would be well advised to hold off the political
struggle and prioritize the bigger social project which requires an
all-embracing, universalistic approach that is less exclusivist and less
essentialist. This will bear upon education and the media, creating leadership
for the wider community, the academy, the media, courts of law and the
civil-military bureaucracy. The political struggle- not needing to be called by
a label, can then be erected on surer footing, a more secure and deep-rooted
social foundation grounded in an ideological framework that is inclusive and
all-embracing, visionary and pragmatic, faithful to its religio-cultural roots
and yet confidently forward-looking and willing to engage.
