What Now?

By Saim Saeed

Finally, Mubarak's gone. While Egyptians deserve plaudit for their unity and courageous efforts to get him out, another tough test - perhaps the toughest - remains: free and fair, multi-party elections and a peaceful transition to democracy. None of this will be easy.

Even though Mubarak has taken flight, his right-hand man and acting Vice President, Omar Suleiman, remains. Not to mention that he was the head of Egyptian intelligence, itself responsible for the intimidation, coercion and repression of hundreds of political dissidents throughout Mubarak's thirty year regime. So while Mubarak's departure does indeed signal progress, it would be remiss to assume that the residue of thirty years of repression also departed with him.

So here's the situation as I see it. The United States, for all its calls of democracy, does not trust it in the hands of Middle Easterners all that much. It didn't work with the Islamic Revolution in Iran; it didn't work with Hamas in Gaza in 2006; it's still not working in Lebanon - at least not the way the United States want it to work.

A lot has been said about the Muslim Brotherhood and the potential threat of a radicalized, anti-Israeli Egypt. I'm a bit more skeptical. For one thing, if the Brotherhood were elected into office (big if), there would not be anything illegitimate about it. Based on popular vote, the most popular party deserves to represent its constituency. Secondly, the Brotherhood has been around for far longer than the advent of Islamic militancy and will be there after it has passed. It is a grassroots organization that has done much to alleviate poverty, feed the starving, and educate the illiterate. It has been the only notable dissident to Mubarak's regime throughout his tenure before the protests, and as far as links with Al-Qaeda are concerned, Al-Qaeda hates the Brotherhood for its renunciation of violence. Religious political parties are a part of the political climate in countries everywhere, including Israel, and I find it slightly xenophobic that only religious Islamic parties are treated with such apprehension, even hostility. As the AK Party of Turkey shows, Islamic does not equal radical.

A legitimate concern of the United States and Israel is the status of the Camp David Accords. The Brotherhood has been critical of Israel in the past, and that is understating it. For this reason, I'm more interested in the internal debate the Brotherhood itself is having with regards to its relationship with Israel (again, that is IF they assume power) than what either the United States or Israel have to say about it. One reason why the Brotherhood has been so critical of Israel is because it caters to popular sentiment; a majority of Egyptians do not support Israel. However, while it might be popular for the Brotherhood to hate on Israel, it doesn't make much strategic sense. Egypt has as much to benefit from the Peace Accords as Israel does, and would be loath to start a re-militarization of forces in the Sinai. Hostilities with Israel would also mean a direct threat from Israel's nuclear weapons and could possibly trigger a nuclear arms race if not all-out war - something Israel has had plenty of experience with and would not hesitate to engage in. Furthermore, Egypt counts on tremendous amounts of foreign aid from the United States in maintaining peace with Israel, and it benefits from substantial revenue that Israeli tourists and trade bring to Egypt. Therefore, I am hoping that the Brotherhood would be sensible enough to maintain the peace accords.

What I am hoping for most is the start of a new political culture. Long has any sort of political organization been a monopoly of the Brotherhood and Mubarak's ironically named National Democratic Party. I'm hoping for new parties catering to different segments of the Egyptian populace. I'm hoping for rallies, new candidates, new leaders, healthy debate, and plenty of opportunity for Egyptians to get their voices heard. This depends on how the military, Suleiman, and Egyptians themselves move from here. It would probably be wise for Suleiman to announce elections for September, giving ample time for people to organize. It might also make elections more competitive than in the current political climate where a dominant leader or party has not emerged to challenge the Brotherhood. However, transitional governments, especially those consisting of the military establishment, rarely tend to be their namesake, and the possibility of Suleiman seeking power for himself remains. In order for this not to happen, Egyptians cannot allow themselves to take their proverbial foot off the gas. They need to make sure their politicians are accountable, and do their duties exactly like they are supposed to. While this might have been a laughable thing to ask of Arabs as recently as a month ago, it is not the case any more. If there was ever a time for governments in the Arab world to fear their people, it is now.