Insights on Egypt's future from Spain's past

I’ve been away from home for the past few days, which has made it difficult to do much writing, but being on the road (or in the air) has allowed me to do some catch-up reading that I’ve been meaning to get to.

In particular, I’ve had time to read and reflect on the state of Egypt, and its future hopes for a democratic society.

Oftentimes I’ve heard comments to the effect of “Arabs (or Egyptians) have no history of democratic governance, and so their transition to a democratic state is either impossible, unlikely, or at best far away.

The claim that Arabs or Egyptians have no history of democratic governance is far too dismissive of a broad-brush statement to be all that useful, but it is an argument that can be made, particularly within the context of the past century. Some fledgling attempts at democracy have taken place, but autocracy has generally been the norm in Egypt and in the wider MENA.

In the course of my reading over the past few days I was struck by a passage in the article “Spain After Franco” by Omar G. Encarnación

“The country’s previous and only significant attempt at living under a democratic system (the brief and chaotic Second Republic, 1931–36) descended into civil war and cemented Spain’s reputation as a society in which conflict and the potential for violence were ever-present.”

I came across the piece while looking for historical insights into possible future directions for Egyptian democracy. In light of the recent disruptions to the Egyptian State Security apparatus, I’ve been looking at a variety of precedents on how post-revolution societies deal with the remnants of the institutions of repression. Argentina, Chile, and South Africa have provided some insights for potential models and outcomes, but post-Franco Spain seems to be fertile ground for clues to a post-Mubarak Egypt.

Spain’s transition from an autocratic dictatorial regime to a democratic one came about in a swift and unexpected fashion – few, if any saw it coming, and as the quotation above suggests, no credible precedent for democratic self-governance existed. After decades of alternating between dictators and civil war, Franco came to power in the 1930’s. Despite his alliance with Italy and Germany during the Second World War, and his ruthless methods of control (secret police, censorship, outlawing of rival political parties, intimidation, torture, arrests, etc.), by the 1950’s he was a strong Cold War ally of the US.

Regardless, within three years of Franco’s death in 1975 Spain was experienceing the successful and unprecedented process of full democratization despite the reticence of established military and religious institutions, the presence of an active domestic terrorist organization, competition between several highly contentious political movements, a major economic collapse, and the cultural scars of decades of brutal repression. An attempt at a military coup failed miserably in 1981, and a year later Spain joined NATO and elected its first non-fascist government in more than four decades.

I highly recommend Encarnacion’s paper – it’s less than ten pages long, but it offers some useful insights and some promising hints towards a positive future for Egypt.

Comments on Egypt and Algeria

No post yesterday - I needed to let it all sink in.

Three days ago I was asking the question “what now?” because Mubarak hadn’t left. today I’m asking that question again, but for the opposite reason.

What lies ahead for Egypt?

I think the important thing to recognize is that neither theocracy nor military dictatorship have much hope of succeeding at this point. This was the essential part of getting Mubarak out of the presidential palace. As long as he was able to defy the will of the Egyptian people the Egyptian people themselves were nothing. Now they’ve been successful - they are suddenly aware of their own power and acutely aware of the fact that what they accomplished was not even the full extent of their capacity. Certainly the crowds in the streets were dramatic, but they were hardly the whole of the population. Any entity that would presume to dictate to the Egyptian people must be prepared for not only their demonstrated capacity, but also their unseen potential.

The protesters faced down water cannons, tear gas, riot police, hired thugs, state propaganda, media lockdowns, and even crazy guys on camels with big sticks. It can certainly be said that they never faced down the Egyptian army itself, but it should also be pointed out that they never had the support of that same army. The Egyptian people became aware of their own capabilities by pushing beyond the what was thought to be possible, without ever reaching its boundaries.

Is it possible that the Army, confident in its capabilities and bolstered by its strengthened position of authority, will seek to establish its own status quo? Certainly.

Is it also possible that the Muslim brotherhood, sensing an opportunity, takes advantage of their own eighty year old infrastructure and mobilizes a political constituency united by the idea that faith without works is dead, transforming Egypt into a 21st-century theocratic institution? Probable, no, possible, yes.

Is it also possible that a neo-imperialist American New World order establishes a puppet state as the gatekeeper into the oil-rich Middle East? Umm… I may… for the sake of argument, let’s just say that’s another possible outcome.

What all of these scenarios have in common is this - the Egyptian people now know for a fact that they can rid themselves of a deeply entrenched 60+ year regime by going into the streets and demanding change. Although the Egyptian military, the Muslim brotherhood, and Western imperialism can certainly take advantage of the events that have taken place in the streets of cities and towns across Egypt, they certainly cannot take credit for them. And frankly, for any of them (or any other opportunist entities) to presume to seize the reins of a country that has suddenly awakened to its own potential is delusional at best.


***

So, big things are afoot.

(A foot? Why are big things afoot rather than at hand? I don’t know - don’t ask questions like that.)

Everybody says, “What’s next?”

Well. I’m glad you asked.

I am a pragmatic optimist at heart, . I think things are getting better, but I’m not stupid about it. Some time ago during a conversation over potential outcomes of the 2009 Iranian election protests, a skeptical mathematician friend of mine dismissed my perspective with a wave and a grunt. “You always think the glass is half full.”

“No, Elmar,” I replied, “it’s all a matter of whether the glass is being filled or being emptied.”

So is the glass being filled or emptied?

Think about that for a minute, in the meantime I will turn our attention to the highlight of the weekend: Algeria.

***

Algeria - February 12 was the scheduled “day of rage/protest” for Algeria.

So what’s been happening in Algeria?

Protests

In fact, the protests were bigger than expected by most. Hundreds, or even thousands of people were arrested. Thousands, and possibly tens of thousands were in the streets. Algeria is not Egypt, of course. Population-wise it is much smaller, despite its geographic size.

So. Protests In Algeria. What’s the outlook?

Well, as a self-proclaimed “pragmatic optimist” I have to say it doesn’t look good.

Algeria is a fascinating and beautiful country with a long and storied history. It’s very close to the top of the list of countries that I would absolutely love to go to Right. Now.

Anyway, the Algerians have had a hell of a time struggling for independence. In the early 90s they actually were able to hold democratic elections, but the establishment was uncomfortable with the projected gains that the Algerian Islamist parties were making, and so halfway through the electoral process the whole thing was suspended and the government declared a state of emergency. This kicked off a rather brutal civil war that saw several disenfranchised Islamic groups engaged in violent terrorists attacks against the established government and vicious retaliations by the military against the Islamists with the civilian population caught in the middle and paying a horrible price.

(Sidenote - I highly recommend Star of Algiers, a great piece of fiction about an aspiring Algerian pop star in the early 1990's.)

This unpleasant and protracted civil war finally found its resolution after 9/11 when the Bush administration started to give gazillions of dollars to any government that was willing to spend the money fighting Islamic terrorists.

In light of that useful cash windfall, the Algerian government (with the full and hearty support of America’s overseas counter-terrorist intelligence network) was able to pretty effectively destroy viable elements of a very unpleasant and ruthless domestic movement (largely by doing unpleasant and ruthless things).

The GSPC (a French acronym for the “Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat) decided that the Algerian alliance with America’s antiterrorist program was a clear call to ratchet up their own game up as well, and so they declared themselves to be an affiliate of Al Qaeda and renamed themselves Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib* (AQIM).

*“Maghrib” is an Arabic word meaning “Where the sun sets” - it refers to North Africa west of Egypt.

Regardless, the Algerian government has been a potent weapon of stagnation when it comes to liberty and democracy in Algeria. Although AQIM is a rather weak organization at this point, conservative Islam is much more deeply entrenched in the common culture of Algeria
than it is in Egypt. I am skeptical (to the point of dismissiveness) when it comes to the potential for an Islamic revival in Egypt, I am much more concerned with the opportunity for a fundamentalist rise to power in Algeria.

Anyway. After all of that, all I’m trying to say is that the protests in Algeria are, in some ways, much more serious than those we saw in Egypt.

“Why?” You might ask.

Well, I’m glad you asked.

The Algerian army has been hard at work battling domestic terrorism for the past two decades. The Egyptian army hasn’t had to engage in combat activity since the early 70s. Here’s the crux - the Algerian army is the fist of the Algerian government. The Egyptian army never had that role.

What we see today in the streets of Cairo is people cleaning up trash. If such a thing were to happen in Algeria, they would be cleaning up bodies.

I know it’s grim, but I suspect that the Algerians are going to have to walk through a lot more ugliness than the Egyptians had to if they want to see Boutiflaka ousted.

Grim Egyptian Humor

At this point it’s clear to pretty much anyone with a TV set or an internet connection that the Egyptian citizenry is pretty pissed off in general, and extremely pissed off at President Mubarak in particular. What we’re seeing in the streets of Cairo, and all across Egypt is a pretty dramatic example of what happens when the chickens come home to roost.

As I’ve said before, I have a compulsive need to provide context and I’ve always believed that humor is a particularly effective window into a culture. Towards that end, I’ve pulled some choice jokes from an article entitled “The Politics of Laughter: Nasser, Sadat, and Mubarak in Egyptian Political Jokes” written by Samer Shehata almost twenty years ago. (He's a good person to pay attention to)

**

A fox in the Western Desert escaped to Libya and the Libyans asked,' Why do you come here?' The fox said, “Because in Egypt they arrest camels.” The Libyans said, “But you are not a camel.” The fox then said, “Of course not, but try telling that to the police!”

(This is an almost universal joke from repressive police states. I first heard it from an Afghani friend of mine in reference to the ISI – Pakistan’s secret police. According to Shehata “Different versions of the joke have been documented in communist Eastern Europe, Nazi Germany, Czarist Russia, and in 12th and 13th century Iranian sources.”)

**

A little ancient Egyptian statue was unearthed, but no one could find out anything about it's background. They summoned expert historians and archeologists from abroad, and still they couldn't find out a single thing about it. The Egyptian secret police heard about the statue, and they said,“Give it to us for twenty-four hours.”

“Twenty-four hours! What can you do in twenty-four hours?”

“None of your business. Just give it to us.”

So the police took it, and before the day was over, they came back with it and said, “This is King So-and-so, son of So-and-so; he ruled at such and such a time and place", and so on and so forth. They told the researchers everything they had been wondering about.

“How did you find all that out? Did you locate his tomb?”

“No." said the police, "He confessed.”

**

Once someone saw a man with his nose bandaged and asked him, “Why is your nose bandaged?” The man said, “I had a tooth removed.” The first man said, “Why didn't you have it removed through your mouth?' whereupon the reply was, “Can anyone in this country open his mouth?'

**

Hosni Mubarak was in a very important meeting with all of his ministers when he got an urgent phone call from Suzanne (his wife). He got up and took the phone call and asked her what the emergency was. Suzanne said, “Oh Hosni, Hosni, our house has been robbed!”

Mubarak said, “Impossible, I’m in a meeting with all of the crooks in Egypt right now!”

**

There was an international conference on surgical operations and representatives of many of the countries of the world attended. The French surgeon told about a man who was in a serious accident and was hurt badly and had to have his heart and kidneys replaced. “Today” the French surgeon said, “he is a professional wrestler.” The English surgeon spoke about a man who was a marathon runner and was hurt badly and had both of his legs replaced and today was still a champion marathon runner. All the representatives, in turn, told about the best operations performed in their countries. Finally, the Egyptian surgeon got up and told of a man who had a brain that didn't work and had it replaced with the brain of a monkey and was now president of Egypt.

**

When Nasser became president he wanted a vice-president who was dumber than he was, so as not to cause him trouble or pose a threat to his power, so he chose Sadat. When Sadat became president he too wanted a vice-president dumber than he was and picked Mubarek. Mubarek has not yet found anyone in Egypt dumber than himself.

**

Suzanne (Mubarak's wife) asked Mubarak why it was that in the days of Sadat Egypt would get much more money from the Americans. Mubarak said, “Because Jihan (Sadat's wife) would go to America and Carter would kiss her here  and here (pointing to both cheeks) and give Egypt two billion dollars.” Mubarak said, “You should go to America to help Egypt (and be kissed by Bush).”
Suzanne said, 'Isn't it forbidden? (in Islam or social practice)”
“No it isn't, but when you come back to Egypt go to the Nile and wipe both cheeks (making a wiping motion on both sides of the face) with Nile water immediately.”
Suzanne went to America and Bush kissed her twice and gave Egypt a check for two billion dollars. When she came back to Egypt she went to the Nile and washed her cheeks, whereupon she saw Zaki Badr (minister of the interior) washing his anus. She asked, "Where did you come from?"
He said, "Saudi Arabia."