An Epic Spasm
A man who ruled mindful of his destiny, viewing himself as the protector of an ancient civilized legacy, hoping to achieve and maintain conformity to his country's values, cultural and religious, has been deposed. Firm autocracy was fundamental to his rule, and fundamental to the politics and social condition of his country. He was no brutal tyrant, but he was a ruthless overseer of his country's well-being, because he felt that was what was required of him.
In the course of his rule those who envisioned another course for their country, a different kind of politics, those who criticized his decision-making and above all, the cruel conditions of sentencing and incarceration for his regime's critics and perceived enemies, became victims of his regime. The kinds of freedoms, of opinion, of assembly, of news, of equality of opportunity that were prevalent in the West were denied the citizens of Egypt.
In the geography of the greater Middle East President Hosni Mubarak saw a picture greater than his country; he saw his country leading the Middle East, as it had done historically, as a guide and a mentor toward the future and an Arab communion with the future. That future was a long time ripening, in the course of which wars took place in defiance of a Jewish State, and a peace agreement reached and maintained that estranged Egypt from its Arab neighbours.
The people of Egypt are not universally grateful to the calm guiding stewardship of Hosni Mubarak, his steering the country toward economic diversity and political empowerment, social acceptance of other religions and a steady state of nervous peace. They were resentful toward his lack of commitment to political diversity, to the prospect of secular democracy beyond the pretense of flawed and corrupted public shows called elections which returned his party to power as though an alternative existed.
No one envisaged such a popular social upheaval as a sustained anti-regime protest resulting in a successful revolution that overturned his dynasty and that of his colleagues, leaving the country's armed forces in total charge of a transition period leading, the protesters hope, to a secular democratic government that will instill changes that will benefit the country. As for the changes, whether a new administration could achieve greater advances than Mr. Mubarak managed, that will be seen.
Whether such a regime will eventuate, or another, more sinister, darker one to match those that have managed to surmount all resistance in other Islamic countries like Iran and Lebanon (and Gaza); perhaps Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Tunisia, Yemen, Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Algeria, is yet to be seen.
But what began in Algeria, spread to Tunisia, infected Egypt and succeeded there, has now broadened its impact.
In the course of his rule those who envisioned another course for their country, a different kind of politics, those who criticized his decision-making and above all, the cruel conditions of sentencing and incarceration for his regime's critics and perceived enemies, became victims of his regime. The kinds of freedoms, of opinion, of assembly, of news, of equality of opportunity that were prevalent in the West were denied the citizens of Egypt.
In the geography of the greater Middle East President Hosni Mubarak saw a picture greater than his country; he saw his country leading the Middle East, as it had done historically, as a guide and a mentor toward the future and an Arab communion with the future. That future was a long time ripening, in the course of which wars took place in defiance of a Jewish State, and a peace agreement reached and maintained that estranged Egypt from its Arab neighbours.
The people of Egypt are not universally grateful to the calm guiding stewardship of Hosni Mubarak, his steering the country toward economic diversity and political empowerment, social acceptance of other religions and a steady state of nervous peace. They were resentful toward his lack of commitment to political diversity, to the prospect of secular democracy beyond the pretense of flawed and corrupted public shows called elections which returned his party to power as though an alternative existed.
No one envisaged such a popular social upheaval as a sustained anti-regime protest resulting in a successful revolution that overturned his dynasty and that of his colleagues, leaving the country's armed forces in total charge of a transition period leading, the protesters hope, to a secular democratic government that will instill changes that will benefit the country. As for the changes, whether a new administration could achieve greater advances than Mr. Mubarak managed, that will be seen.
Whether such a regime will eventuate, or another, more sinister, darker one to match those that have managed to surmount all resistance in other Islamic countries like Iran and Lebanon (and Gaza); perhaps Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Tunisia, Yemen, Pakistan,
Afghanistan and Algeria, is yet to be seen.
But what began in Algeria, spread to Tunisia, infected Egypt and succeeded there, has now broadened its impact.
Labels: Crisis Politics, Egypt, Middle East
posted by Pieface | 2:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home