5
Military rule throughout history is not a form of government that tends itself toward tolerance and understanding,openness and democracy. It is rather a rigid means of ruling a country, a people and a society that has often led to the radicalisation of segments of that very society, especially Islamists in the Middle East and Central Asia.
While I do not believe Egypt will follow this trend and develop a nascent Islamist movement that will return to the violence it showed in the 1980s and 1990s, there are worrying signs that it must be curtailed before it has a chance to make a renaissance in the country, and looking toward Pakistan might be an important first step in ensuing democracy flourishes, as the radicals do not.
Over the past two weeks, Salafist Muslims – those who take a literal interpretation of the Qur’an – have shown they can be a force to reckon with in Egypt. In the Qena government in Upper Egypt, hundreds of angry protesters took to the streets following the appointment of a Coptic governor. They demanded he be removed in favor of a Muslim governor and shut down trains to and from the governorate and blocked government officials from going to work.
What began as a protest against an official who had been a part of the former ruling regime ousted on February 11, 2011 with the fall of President Hosni Mubarak, and saw Copts and Muslims demanding a change of leadership, quickly turned into a vehement anti-Christian demonstration, with videos online showing protesters calling Christians "infidels" and stirring fears of sectarian violence.
The Salafis cannot be ignored. On April 25, Egypt's Prime Minister Essam Sharaf appeared to acquiesce to the demonstrators' demands, dissolving the government, including the newly appointed governor, and installing an interim Muslim leader to the area. Protesters appear willing to ease their clampdown on the governorate and life appears ready to return to normal.
It highlights the importance of dealing head on with these extreme conservatives. Egypt must be willing to open a dialogue with all segments of society, including those who desire to implement a strict interpretation of Islamic Sharia law. By avoiding such a dialogue, democracy will never prevail in Egypt, and the rise of the extremists could turn into open violent conflict with the government, much the same way it has arisen in Pakistan.
Islamabad has long been opposed to dealing with their extremist elements. During the 1970s and 1980s, the government cracked down hard on Islamists in the country, dealing them what they believed to be a knockout blow, but over the past two decades, the rise again of violence has left Pakistan with bombings, attacks and assassinations of officials who speak out against the radicals.
The Pakistani government's violent campaign against the Islamists has pushed them into a corner. There is little, if any dialogue between differing groups and this has led to an upsurge in violence. The failure can be summed up in one word: democracy. Rather, lack thereof.
Egypt has an opportunity to learn from Islamabad’s meanderings and failures. The failure to establish a dialogue, and ultimately the failure to establish a democratic system that incorporated the extreme Islamists in the country under the flag of openness and justice.
Recently, as Egypt's post-revolution phase began and the military took control of all aspects of life, I spoke with Daanish Faruqi, a Middle East expert and Pakistani-American. We discussed the similarities between the military take over and the 1970s military overhaul in Pakistan. While we agreed there are massive differences, he did say something that is stuck in my mind: "Egypt is not Pakistan in the sense that this was a popular uprising that comprised all portions of society, but there must be some worries that military rule will not bring the change the people desire."
That desire is democratic reform. The military, for its part, has declared elections will take place, as early as this fall, but still, tensions are running high, especially as Egyptians, the extremists included, enjoy a heightened sense of freedom they have been void of for decades. This has led to statements that antagonize and alienate, leading to the confrontation witnessed in Qena between Muslims and Copts.
Looking forward, Pakistan's failure to create a viable democratic government led to the rise of Islamist extremism and violence. Egypt can take a different route.
By putting into place honest and true democratic institutions, from the local municipal level to the national government, Egypt can avoid the pitfalls of military rule by moving away from the army’s control as quickly as possible.
Prime Minister Sharaf appears to understand this, saying on national television that there would be local elections in Qena in order to democratically elect a new governor. This shows that he sees that by not allowing the people to choose their leaders, tension and possible violence, can quickly ensue.
This should not be seen as succumbing to the pressures of the protesters, instead a show of democratic force. Egypt is a multi-faceted society with myriad different opinions, much like Pakistan. It is at once tribal and cosmopolitan. The vast majority of Egyptians have no desire to see a radical conservative form of Islam implemented in their country. The Salafists know this.
If dialogue cannot be created to incorporate all segments of society, Egypt runs the risk of falling into the Pakistani conundrum that is difficult to overcome. Democracy and freedom of expression – albeit with guidelines to avoid hate speech – can be the future of Egypt that allows it to flourish and show the world that democracy and Islam are not only compatible, but are intrinsically a part of one another in today's modern world.
The writer is an American journalist based in Cairo and is the Editor-in-chief of bikyamasr.com
