Commentary
Amr Hamzawy
{
"authors": [
"Amr Hamzawy"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Egypt"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Fear And Worry Are the Enemies of Egypt's Future
While those who voted against the recently passed constitutional amendments in Egypt may feel disheartened, they should continue to engage in political life in order to play a crucial role in enabling the transition to democracy to succeed.
By Amr Hamzawy
Published on Mar 30, 2011
Source: National
Now, the national forces that worked for a "no" vote on these amendments and rejected the quick timetable and other related measures have no choice but to immediately prepare for Egypt's next challenge in the parliamentary elections.
The referendum has determined the mechanism by which the constitution will be changed and, with the next elections, Egypt will take a second great step towards democratic transition.
Many of those who voted against the amendments feel a mix of frustration, fear and worry today.
Their frustration results from the weakness of their voting bloc, which slightly exceeded 22 per cent of the vote. Their fear comes from the power of the religious forces that supported the amendments, which were passed by a majority of voters. And their worry stems from the fact that they must now face parliamentary elections without the tools for effective competition.
However, surrendering to this negative atmosphere - which is based more on exaggeration than on serious analysis - could have disastrous consequences.
The voting bloc that rejected the amendments is not a marginalised minority; it comprises almost one fourth of the 41 million voters who participated in the referendum. Nor were religious forces the only ones who supported the amendments. Indeed, those who voted "yes" should not be considered as a monolithic bloc; many citizens favoured the amendments for reasons that had nothing to do with the rhetoric of religious forces.
There is a worry among some Egyptians that the Muslim Brotherhood will dominate the parliamentary elections, giving them control of parliament and the constitutional assembly that will be charged with drafting the new charter.
Although reason for this concern exists, it must not interfere with the democratic process and political competition. It must not cause national forces to shun the elections instead of entering them and encouraging citizens to participate. The words "frustration", "fear" and "worry" will not produce a healthy, vibrant democracy.
Egypt has no time to surrender to this negative sentiment. The central discussion about the electoral regime must begin now and aim to craft a clear public preference among citizens for a regime that combines party lists and independent seats.
Egypt must also hold ongoing discussions between various national forces on the creation and announcement of political parties.
Discussions so far have focused on two options. The first is the search for parties that would unite leftists and liberals in support of democracy and the civil state. The second is the desire to form parties based on a clear political identity. This latter approach could split the votes of the constituencies that support democracy and a state built on civil institutions.
With the referendum complete, Egyptians must begin now to form unified parties that can quickly agree on candidates for the parliamentary elections and present them to their constituencies.
After elections, Egyptians should enter a second phase in the transition to democracy by forming political parties based on pure identity, especially if the first phase does not permit integrated party programmes to be drafted.
Organising politically into representative blocs will help to ensure that the transition to democracy succeeds. Otherwise, Egyptians may find themselves lapsing into a lethal mix of frustration, fear and worry that can undermine the entire project.
About the Author
Amr Hamzawy
Director, Middle East Program
Amr Hamzawy is a senior fellow and the director of the Carnegie Middle East Program. His research and writings focus on Egypt’s and other middle powers’ involvement in regional security in the Middle East, particularly through collective diplomacy and multilateral conflict resolution
- The Two Key Takeaways From Xi’s Egypt Visit
- The Drone Attack on Egypt and the Widening Middle East WarCommentary
Amr Hamzawy
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- Ten Years After Karimov’s Death, How Much Has Uzbekistan Really Changed?Commentary
In the tenth year of his presidency, President Mirziyoyev’s system is becoming even more personalized than that of his predecessor Karimov.
Galiya Ibragimova
- As a Former Defense Minister Revolts in Ukraine, Is Zelensky’s System Fracturing?Commentary
The greater threat to Zelensky comes not from Fedorov alone, but from the convergence between the former defense minister’s political campaign and the anti-corruption investigations moving ever closer to the presidential administration.
Balázs Jarábik
- Fedorov’s Challenge to Zelensky Could Upend Ukrainian PoliticsCommentary
With his public call for new elections in Ukraine, ex-defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov has opened Pandora’s box.
Konstantin Skorkin
- Russia’s Rubber-Stamp Duma Elections Are Exposing Schisms in Putin's RegimeCommentary
In the discussions made possible by the State Duma election campaign, one question is being asked more and more loudly. “What next?”
Andrey Pertsev
- Russia Is Approaching a Political CrossroadsCommentary
Two divergent trends—Putin’s hardline vision of how to prosecute the war in Ukraine, and a growing desire for change in Russia—could tear the regime apart.
Tatiana Stanovaya
