Keep quiet and send money

Yesterday’s discussion of Egypt moderated by Freedom House’s Charles Dunne and sponsored by the Middle East Institute at the Carnegie Endowment was way more optimistic than many, but not convincingly so.

Hafez al Mirazi of the American University in Cairo was the most upbeat.  He is pleased that the revolution’s secularists joined forces with now President-elect Morsi in a civilian front intending to oust the military from power.  This alliance will continue until the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) hands over power.  Morsi, two of whose children are American citizens, is intending to bring a broad spectrum of people into his government.  SCAF will have little influence, beyond the power to declare war.  But then a few minutes later he admitted that the SCAF and the “deep state” (not further defined) will be a corrupting influence.  There is a lot to be done to ensure accountability, including investigation of the secret police and publication of archives.

Khaled Elgindy of Brookings was less upbeat.  The liberal consituency that brought about the revolution is now fragmented.  None of its components seems to be capable of a good “ground game”  among the Egyptian people.  Morsi will try to maintain good communication with Egypt’s Christians, but he needs to go beyond tokenism if he is going to win them over.  There is a real need to strengthen the judiciary and rule of law, including transitional justice.  But it is unclear how strong the commitment to accountability of the old regime is.  There is a palpable reluctance to dig up the past.  Economic development and security may take priority.  The “deep state” will persist, opening up to newcomers and trying to preserve its privileged hold on economic resources.

Nathan Brown of George Washington University was somewhere in the middle.  The West has gotten used to the idea of Morsi as Egypt’s president and support has been more forthcoming than anticipated.  The Americans have gotten the reassurance they need on Israel; the Europeans have gotten what they need on human rights.  The problem for Morsi is lack of resources.  The naming of a Christian vice president will be seen as a big and controversial step by the Muslim Brotherhood, but it won’t count for a lot with the Christians if it is tokenism.  Morsi’s primary concerns will be security and the economy.  The stock market rose 15% on his win, but he will have to sort out priorities among the Brotherhood’s economic directions:  social justice, sharia compliant finance and liberal “Washington consensus” policies.  The courts, which have played a major role in the transition so far, will now have to tussle with a democratically legitimated president.  SCAF influence in the courts remains substantial, with individual Supreme Constitutional and administrative judges beholden to the army.

Tellingly, the three presenters gave different answers to the question whether Egypt was really in a democratic transition, or not.  Hafez al Mirazi said yes, of course.  Morsi represents the revolution, which is now beyond the violent stage.  Khaled Elgindy said no, it has not yet really started.  Only now with Ahmed Shafiq’s concession of defeat can a real transition begin.  Nathan Brown thought there had certainly been a move towards democracy after the fall of Mubarak, but the process is unclear and losing momentum.

On the U.S. role, the advice was the same as I used to give alumni when I was an undergraduate:  keep quiet and send money.  That’s going to be hard to sustain unless there is clearer evidence that Egypt is moving in a direction the West finds acceptable.  Morsi’s vow today to seek freedom for Omar Abdel-Rahman, who is serving life in prison for conspiracy to blow up the World Trade Center eight years before 9/11, is not going to endear him to Americans.