Egypt’s Three Revolutions. By Thomas L. Friedman.
Egypt’s Three Revolutions. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, July 23, 2013.
Friedman:
If
you’re looking for any silver lining in what is happening in Egypt today, I
suggest you go up 30,000 feet and look down. From that distance, the events in
Egypt over the past two-and-a-half years almost make sense. Egypt has actually had three revolutions
since early 2011, and when you add them all up, you can discern a message about
what a majority of Egyptians are seeking.
The
first revolution was the Egyptian people and the Egyptian military toppling
President Hosni Mubarak and installing the former defense minister, the aging
Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, as the de facto head of state. Tantawi
and his colleagues proved utterly incompetent in running the nation and were
replaced, via a revolutionary election, by the Muslim Brotherhood’s party, led
by President Mohamed Morsi. He quickly tried to consolidate power by
decapitating the military and installing Brotherhood sympathizers in important
positions. His autocratic, noninclusive style and failed economic leadership
frightened the Egyptian center, which teamed up last month with a new
generation of military officers for a third revolution to oust Morsi and the
Brotherhood.
To put
it all in simpler terms: Egypt’s first revolution was to get rid of the dead
hand, the second revolution was to get rid of the deadheads and the third
revolution was to escape from the dead end.
The
first revolution happened because a large number of mostly non-Islamist
Egyptian youths grew fed up with the suffocating dead hand of the Mubarak era —
a hand so dead that way too many young Egyptians felt they were living in a
rigged system, where they had no chance of realizing their full potential,
under a leader with no vision. After some 30 years of Mubarak’s rule and some
$30 billion in American aid, roughly one-third of Egyptians still could not
read or write.
The
generals who replaced Mubarak, though, were deadheads not up to governing — so
dead that many liberal Egyptians were ready to vote for the Muslim
Brotherhood’s Morsi over a former Mubarak-era general in the June 2012
election. But Morsi proved more interested in consolidating the Brotherhood’s
grip on government rather than governing himself, and he drove Egypt into a
dead end — so dead that Egyptians took to the streets on June 30 and virtually
begged the military to oust Morsi.
Add it
all up and there is a message from the Egyptian majority: No more dead hands;
we want a government that aspires to make Egypt the vanguard of the Arab world
again. No more deadheads; we want a government that is run by competent people
who can restore order and jobs. And no more dead ends; we want a government
that will be inclusive and respect the fact that two-thirds of Egyptians are
not Islamists and, though many are pious Muslims, they don’t want to live in anything
close to a theocracy.
It is
difficult to exaggerate how much the economy and law and order had deteriorated
under President Morsi. So many Egyptians were feeling insecure that there was a
run on police dogs! So many tour guides were out of work that tourists were
warned to avoid the Pyramids because desperate camel drivers and
postcard-sellers would swarm them. A poll this week by the Egyptian Center for
Public Opinion Research found that 71 percent of Egyptians were “unsympathetic
with pro-Morsi protests.”
Yes, it
would have been much better had Morsi been voted out of office. But what is
done is done. We need to make the best of it. The right thing for President
Obama to be doing now is not only to ignore calls for cutting off economic aid
to Egypt — on grounds that the last revolution amounted to a military coup. We
should be trying to get everyone in the world to help this new Egyptian
government succeed.
Not
surprisingly, people are worried that Egypt’s military could stay in power
indefinitely. It’s a danger, but I am less worried about that. The Egyptian
people have been empowered. A majority of Egyptians have — three times now
since 2011 — called a halt to their government’s going down the wrong path.
I am
worried about something else: Egyptians defining the right path and getting a
majority to follow that path. That is an entirely different kind of challenge,
and I am not sure Egypt can ever get to that level of consensus. But this
government offers the best hope for that. It has good people in important
positions, like Finance and Foreign Affairs. It is rightly focused on a fair
constitution and sustainable economic reform. Its job will be much easier if
the Muslim Brotherhood can be re-integrated into politics, and its war with the
military halted. But the Brotherhood also needs to accept that it messed up —
badly — and that it needs to re-earn the trust of the people.
This is no time for America to be punishing
Egyptians or demanding quick elections. Our job is to help the new government
maximize the number of good economic decisions it makes, while steadily
pressuring it to become more inclusive and making it possible for multiple
political parties to form. If that happens, Egypt will have a proper foundation
to hold democratic elections again. If it doesn’t happen, no number of
elections will save it.