Egypt: No time for blame game

The Egyptian military’s crackdown on two sit-in camps in Cairo and the continuing defiance of the Islamists have made the call for democracy for the time being an unnecessary commodity. Far from being stable, Egypt may descend into civil war and this calls for a sobering course by all players. The issue of who is right and who is wrong should take a backseat to the pressing need of stability.
Neither the Muslim Brothers nor the military has fought for democracy in the first place. The struggle has been for power. Therefore, the naïve call for the restoration of the democratic rule rings very hollow now. I am not making the case that democracy is not important though. All I want say is that the Egyptian society needs stability with a roadmap for transition.
It is one thing we condemn the violence and another thing to support the restoration of what once was. After months of sever polarization within Egypt, the country deserves a profound and meticulous scheme to rise from the ashes. Some American politicians and senators are urging the Obama administration to cut off aid to Egypt because of the “coup.” I still do not see how this immature call would stabilize the situation in a divided Egypt. Needless to say, that the Americans have been playing a negative role. The visit of two prominent Senators — Lindsay Graham and John McCain — created an impression that there is a powerful bloc in America supporting the Muslim Brotherhood.
And yet, the deadly crackdown narrowed Obama’s room of maneuverability. A bloc of both conservative and liberals in the United States has put pressure on President Obama to stand up to the generals who stifled democracy in a country that was on transition. But on the other hand, the Israelis and the moderate Arab axis has urged Obama to turn a blind eye to the generals, who are seen as waging a proxy war against Islamists’ threat.
There are those who think that Islamists would come to terms with reality if they feel that the international community has turned it back on them. However, the wide international condemnation has in fact boosted their morals and for this reason Islamists may keep on defying the military. But a country that is consumed by civil strife may become a dysfunctional ally for any of the players who have a stake in Egypt.
The regional polarization on the issue further complicates the Egyptian tumultuous situation. What has transpired over the course of the current Egyptian crisis is that the battle is not over democracy. In other words, the divide is not between forces favoring democracy and forces opposing democracies. All regional players see the Egyptian crisis from the perspective of what best serve their national interests.
Apart from the regional calculations, I believe that the United States still can influence events in Egypt. And instead of debating who is right and who is wrong, the American administration as well as the international community should be looking for ways to defuse the volatile standoff in the country. This entails a more assertive American foreign policy instead of this wishy-washy and confused foreign policy.
To be sure, democracy is the only solution for the region in the long run. Since 2003, the region has experienced a surge in the politics of identity. Therefore, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the nation-state as it is now in the Arab world is dysfunctional. Sub-identities and sectarian affiliations come before the national identity in key countries. It follows that only democracy, the rules of law and pluralism can keep these countries intact.
A while ago, it was fashionable to say that autocracy was behind the underdevelopment and the pervasive corruption in much of the Arab countries. For this reasons, the youth throughout the region threw their weight behind the Arab uprisings and democratic transitions. Sadly, some began reconsidering the link between democracy and progress. To an increasing number of people, the Arab Spring has yet to bring about prosperity and freedom void of disorder and instability. It is obvious that the transitions to democracy in this part of the world can be more perilous than elsewhere due to the importance of sub-identities and the entrenched nature of tribal and sectarian affiliations.

• [email protected]