Which way from the point of no return?
The Arab Spring movement began in neighbouring Tunisia, but it was not until Hosni Mubarak stepped down as president of Egypt after 30 years of absolute rule just over 100 days ago that it became clear that the Arab world had reached a point of no return. Now, as the revolutionary movements in other countries in the region are meeting much more resistance, many people are asking if the revolutions in Tunisia and especially in Egypt will fullfil their promises of full democracy.
One thing that is clear is that for the first time in many decades the fates of these nations will be decided with minimal influence from the West, which from the start of the upheavals has reacted to rather than directed events.
That said, it is an overriding consideration in Washington and other Western capitals that they be seen to act ''on the right side of history''. This explains the tightrope US President Barack Obama is walking with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian settlement and the call for the first time by the US leader for Israel to begin negotiations for a Palestinian state based on Israel's pre-1967 borders, with ''mutually agreed swaps''.
It is telling that Mr Obama laid out this position on Thursday night in a major foreign policy speech on the Middle East and North Africa on the eve of a visit from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who promptly rejected the condition outright. In the Oval Office on Friday, Mr Netanyahu told Mr Obama: ''While Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines _ because these lines are indefensible.''
By all appearances a negotiated settlement for a Palestinian state is still a long way off, and therefore the issue will play a big part in the newly emerging foreign policies of liberated Tunisia and Egypt, especially the latter, which is expected to take up a role as a regional powerhouse after many years of following Washington's lead.
But a coherent foreign policy isn't really possible in either country until some basic structures of the new governments are formed. In Tunisia, this seems easier to accomplish, as traditionally the military has not played a large role in politics.
Tunisia's civilian-led interim government has announced that it will step down after Constituent Assembly elections are held on July 24. There are also encouraging signs that the new government will be inclusive and secular.
In Egypt, on the other hand, the presidency has been held by one general or another since the early 1950s, and the military comprises the interim government known as the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (Scaf).
More worrying, the emergency law which was put in effect when Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1981 has not been lifted, and Egyptian activists say the military is still conforming to the familiar role it held under Mr Mubarak of silencing dissent.
Earlier this month Amnesty International accused Egyptian authorities of continuing to restrict freedom of assembly, torture detainees and try civilians in military courts. Amnesty reports that in meetings its representatives had with the government it was stated that the total number of administrative detainees was less than 800. No details on these detainees were given.
This is considerably less than the estimated 6,000 to 10,000 detainees held in recent years, but obviously it is still a major cause for concern when citizens can be picked up for any offence, real or imagined, and locked away without due process.
Parliamentary elections are scheduled in Egypt for September, but by proclamation of the Scaf the parliament will not form a government ''until a president is elected'' at a date yet to be specified. Meanwhile, the Scaf will retain broad powers.
While arbitrary arrests and other human rights abuses are reprehensible and should be formally outlawed immediately, it can be argued that a transition period is necessary to keep order and the military is the logical institution to oversee the transition, as even some pro-democracy leaders have said.
The forces of democracy are still flushed with their victory in Cairo's Tahrir Square and it's unlikely they will retreat meekly into the background now. As Mr Obama said on Thursday night: ''It's not America that put people into the streets of Tunis or Cairo _ it was the people themselves who launched these movements, and it's the people themselves that must ultimately determine their outcome.''
0 comments:
Post a Comment