Azzurra Meringlo 12/ 2011

According to the numbers of the early hours, at least eleven million Egyptians have gone to the polls in the first of three shifts by means of which the Maglis al-shaab will be elected, the lower chamber of the Egyptian Parliament. This figure is equivalent to 70% of the citizens entitled to vote residing in the first nine governorships that have voted, Apart from the citizens of Cairo, the voters who went to the polls were the residents of the governorships of Fayuom, Port Said, Damietta, Alessandria, Kafr El-Sheikh, Assiut, Luxor and Red Sea. Even if a large turnout was expected, not at all comparable to the absenteeism that has characterised the “elections” under the Mubarak presidency, the organisers did not think that four million citizens more might have voted – these are the figures relating to just the first nine governorships – as compared with the ones who had taken part in last March’s referendum. Besides showing the enthusiasm and the interest of the Egyptians in a process of transition leading to the creation of a democratic system, the increase in the number of participants shows how critical the condition of Egypt is in these current weeks as it finds itself suspended between the bite of the military, the creation of a new executive and the long electoral process. After another two electoral days, in the first ten days of January the actual make-up of the Maglis al-Shaab will be known, while for the Shura, the upper chamber of the Parliament, it will be necessary to wait for two more months. The week that preceded the voting was marked by a second wave of important street protests which the army replied to with an escalation of violence such as had never been seen before, not even in the days of Mubarak. By causing the death of over forty protesters, the army tried to silence a mass of Egyptians who had gone back to Tahrir square, the epicentre of the revolt that erupted on 25th January this year, calling once again for the resignation of the Prime Minister, Essam Sharaf, and the transfer of military power to a civilian junta. Seeing the numbers in the square rising and feeling the pressure of the United States that had criticised the army’s violence, the military had apologised to the families of the victims, brought forward the presidential elections to June 2012 and dissolved the government, giving Kamal Ganzuri the task of forming a new one. Formerly Prime Minister in the Mubarak era from 1993 to 1996, Ganzuri is not liked by the activists who, seeing the climate of violence that had been created, have also asked to postpone the elections. Some of them have suggested the creation of a government of national solidarity led by Mohammed El Baradei, ex-secretary general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The latter has also said he is ready to withdraw his candidature at the upcoming presidential elections if he is offered this post. Nevertheless, Ganzuri has decided to continue along his path, deciding to announce the new team after officially announcing the results of the first electoral round which, according to the forecasts, should see the victory of the Muslim Brothers. Uncertain as to whether to vote or not, the activist, some of whom have announced they will withdraw their candidature – even if technically it was impossible to do so -, have deemed the promises of the military to be insufficient and have continued to occupy the square. Some have also described the elections held under the military control as being illegal. In spite of this, millions of people have stayed in Tahrir square for a long time, they have decided to go and vote knowing that the appointment with the polls was one of the first stages that the activists had set themselves when they had started to fight against the regime. If the large turnout at the polls should not therefore be considered as a contradiction with the square, the street policy does not aim to be an alternative to the elections that are indeed an instrument of democracy, but not the only one. The resistance of the square thus appears as a further component of the revolution that tries to unhinge once and for all the oligarchies that do not want to detach themselves from power. Those who do not want to give power seem to be not only the military, but also the old characters of the regime who, once the former President’s National Democratic Party has been dissolved, ran for the parliamentary elections in new parties that have in part disguised their roots. This show that to definitely shake off the complex system of corruption set up by Mubarak and to keep the military in their barracks, Egypt is trying to combine street protests with the voting policy. Even if the final balance will be made only in a few months’ time, the forecasts indicate that Freedom and Justice, the party of the Muslim Brothers that dominates the Democratic Alliance will get at least 40% of the preferences. It is also for this reason that in the week preceding the elections the Islamist movement decided not to go to the square to criticise the violence of the military, aligning itself with the army in wanting to guarantee the holding of the elections at all costs. Once the final results are known, the Brothers will have to decide with which other forces they will be allied to govern, whether to opt for their Salafite cousins, with whom there is an historical rivalry that had led the pair to run in different coalitions, or whether to open to the secular members of the Egyptian Bloc. Even the role that the army will play in the new Egypt above all depends on the capacity that those who take office will have not only in governing the country efficiently, but also in creating a widespread consensus that will keep it united, confining the function of the military to inside the barracks. Even if for many people the target of reference is Turkey in 2002, there are some who fear that if the consensus is not created, the same thing that happened in Turkey in the 1980s will be repeated in Egypt, when the military took over power with a coup d’état. The question relating to the new constitution is also in the air, which should be drafted by a constituent assembly elected by the outgoing parliament. The Islamists insist on repeating that the only actor who will have the right to write up the rights and duties of the Egyptians will be the assembly elected by the new Parliament, but the seculars oppose the idea of making the constitution a prize to be awarded to the winners of the elections. Believing that it is essential to draft a text that also respects the rights of the minorities and not only the victorious majorities, the secular claims are that there should be supranational constitutional principles that lead the constituents in drafting the text. Lastly, the latter ask that in the make-up of the assembly there should be provisions representing the minorities, whether they are political, religious or gender-based. Even if many tend to describe it as a second revolution, what is taking place in Egypt is no more than the second stage of a revolt that started last year, which albeit culminating with the fall of President Mubarak, has not yet run its course and is continuing along its path to completely fulfil its objectives.

Azzurra Meringolo
(Department of International Studies, University of Rome III)