![]()
22 May 2005
Mind or muscle might
Next
Wednesday will witness the public referendum on the constitutional amendment
which was passed by Parliament earlier this month, and which allows for the
first multi-candidate presidential elections in
President
Mubarak’s initiative to amend article 76 of the
Constitution was seen by many as a stone cast in stagnant waters. Its ripple
effect restored hopes in the possibility of
The
change we dream of will never be presented to us on a plate of gold. At the
same time, we will not seize it through violence or force, but can only attain
it through awareness and understanding. Politically, the saying goes that “what
cannot be attained absolutely should not be abandoned absolutely”.
Consequently, participation and voting are patriotic duties. Boycotting,
condemning, or rejecting the referendum are nothing but impotent tools which
only serve to play into the hands of anti-reform powers.
I
imagine that the proposed constitutional change should attain the required
public consent through strong participation. Only then can we move on to modernise and develop our political system, so that new,
serious, convincing movements may emerge, with enough public backing to provide
a way out of the current squeeze between the ruling party and the religious
fundamentalists.
Anyone
who contemplates the events of the past two weeks since Parliament approved the
proposed constitutional amendment, will observe
serious defects in the manner of public expression. Opposing demonstrations
swiftly resort to wrathful, indecent language, creating a climate which leads
to violence, and aborting the opportunity of instating the right to
demonstrate. Observers will note that these demonstrations are in the main part
initiated by the members of Kifaya movement—trying
yet to gain a foothold in the political street—and the Islamist current,
frequently termed the ‘Friday party’ since its demonstration usually start in
mosques, following Friday prayers. The deplorable outcome—the inevitable
skirmishes with the police—appear as an show of force
or confrontation between the ruling regime and the bastions of religion or free
opinion. I do not believe that any sensible person would condone such behaviour.
I
would imagine that the coming period should witness political dialogue,
discussion and debate, through which every political movement would present its
ideology and agenda, and maybe stress the points of agreement in lieu of those
of conflict. This would definitely serve to strengthen the call for political
participation by properly informing the public of all the political
players—exposing both the weak and the strong—and encouraging the silent
majority to take an active stance and head to the ballot boxes. There are
indeed several commendable programmes which serve
such a purpose on the radio; I hope TV channels would take their cue and
emulate them.
If
the ruling National Democratic Party—the ‘elder brother’ on the Egyptian
political scene—follows this course, it will succeed in putting an end to the
deplorable practice it employed last week when it sent supporters to assault
those who demonstrated against it. Perhaps then it would prove that dialogue
power is more effective than muscle might.