The Messiness of Democracy

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have tried from time to time.
            Winston Churchill, 1947

The immediate failure of the Egyptian democracy experiment is not tragic – to call it such would suggest that it was unpredictable.  Unfortunately, the travails in one of our oldest civilizations are banal with a litter of broken civilizations lining the years since democracy was first conceived.  In the movie Body Heat, Teddy the arsonist (played by Mickey Rourke) says “you got fifty ways you can (screw) up and if you can think of twenty-five of them, you’re a genius and you ain’t no genius.”  So fall those who attempt democracy.  The situation in Egypt today is dangerous, regionally threatening and requires the strongest language and action from President Obama and other of the world’s democratic leaders.    

The United States undoubtedly was lucky.  Our government was put together by men who understood and valued the law.  Yet, despite the fact that our founding fathers were geniuses for their time, they screwed up and often.  The Federalist government during the Adams administration passed a law making it essentially illegal to criticize the government.  There was a presidential donnybrook in the aftermath of the 1800 presidential election when a tied electorate threw the outcome in doubt.  When President William Henry Harrison died in 1841, it created an uncertainty as to who was indeed the president.  Vice President John Tyler became president but was constantly challenged by Harrison’s cabinet, doubting his legitimacy.   

Civil War broke apart the country for five years over our inability to understand and implement the best intentions of our founding fathers.  Presidents during the Gilded Age of the late 1800s were mere bystanders to the events that transpired around them.  Historians have charged various presidents ranging from Abraham Lincoln to Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush of overstepping their power.  Leaders ranging from Andrew Johnson to Richard Nixon to Bill Clinton have broken laws.  We’ve denied rights to many of our citizens at one time or another.  Our country has faced scandal, defeat, embarrassment and uncertainty.  Yet, we are extolled as one of the oldest, operable democracies on the planet.  We are, as John Winthrop called us, a city upon the hill – an example to the rest of the world.   We take our mistakes and always try to learn from them in the spirit of creating a more perfect union. 

And so, we turn our war weary heads to the bedlam that is Egypt.  The worst thing that could have happened was the military control of the government and the imprisonment of Mohammad Morsi.  He is flawed, he is possibly corrupt and he was at times dismissive of the constitutional restraints of his office.  He was likely not what the majority of Egyptians wanted but for the sake of future democracy in the land of the pharaohs, it was paramount that he remain in office and finish out his term.  The course that the country is taking is not towards stability but towards anarchy and a permanent distrust of the will of the people.  The lasting gift of democracy is a people’s belief that the government will act as it needs to in times of turmoil and when faltering, right itself.  For a democratic government to work, the people must have faith in it.  The Egyptians, certainly the supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, do not, though the aforementioned group does not help by persecuting various religious minorities. 

The military leaders are serving as an éminence grise but the beauty of democracy is that rule and authority are out in the open and available for all to see.  The world’s democratic leaders need to up their pressure on the Egyptian military while at the same time putting measures in place that could assist a righted Egypt back on the course of democracy.  George W. Bush was right in that all people have an inherent desire for the freedoms of democracy.  Yet, democracy demands a heavy responsibility from the leaders who wield authority and from the people who must accept the decision of the nation, however misguided they might think the majority to be.  Prime Minister Churchill was correct.  Let us hope that the Egyptians have the chance to understand and embrace that. 

Many Faces and Many Challenges

For moderate and modern Muslims, it must be a tiring thing to watch, once more, as clerics stoke highly impressionable and easily angered radicals to rise up and destroy and kill over something as insignificant as a low-budget movie that, were it not for the violence, no one would have heard of or thought much about.  Yet, we see the hostility from various countries around the world.  Worse, we see governments, namely Egypt, who provides the most ineffectual of rebukes on the riots and attacks on foreign embassies.  It is with Egypt that the U.S. is most concern but the crisis is twofold – religious and political. 

From a religious point of view, where do the renewed attacks, protests and riots leave Islam?  I don’t suspect that Muslims do or should care of how they are perceived outside their mosques and homes but it must have occurred to some regarding the level of insecurity in faith the actions of a few represent.  In Islam’s early days, the religion was a vibrant and progressive faith whose focus on education and exploration, of the world and of ideas.  Indeed, the Muslims were responsible for the preservation of Greek and Roman knowledge and philosophies.  However, as the faith grew and the empires it counseled grew larger and more suspicious, Muslim clerics forbade outside or new ideas that could not be validated by the Qur’an.  In doing so, the Muslims turned their backs on their own greatness and turned inwards, fearful of those from without who sought to pollute their faith.  Today, if Islam is characterized by anything, it is those whose anti-modernity pervert the faith and its tenets.  Meanwhile, Muslims who do not share such sentiments are overshadowed, outshouted and ignored. 

Politically, this can only worsen relations between the Arab nations and the West.  The United States has supported, albeit weakly, the movements that have sought a greater voice throughout the Middle East.  However, as has been mentioned before, the Arab Spring has become more a hopeful description rather than an accurate one.  Indeed, some of the same corrupt powers are being wielded by new faces that previously represented the voices of the oppressed.  Though the U.S. did not do as much as many would have preferred, the actions of rioters are mystifying given that which the Americans have done.  To Americans, the blame we “share” for the making of this film is telling in two ways.  To citizens where the government approves or disapproves of any form of expression, there is a lack of understanding of how things work in a free society, where most have little knowledge of such a film.  Second, the clerics and leaders whipping people into a frenzy couldn’t care less about Mohammad or his teachings; the film is simply an excuse to strike against those they hate.

Protestors destroyed our embassies and killed our representatives.  Meanwhile, what does the U.S. do?  The general consensus is that Libya has shown more stability and more outrage to the actions of a few than seen elsewhere.  In Egypt, we give nearly $2b in foreign aid and President Obama has extended his greatest amount of support to President Morsi and recognition of the elected government.  The lack of support and weakness of the response to the rioters suggest that the current Egyptian government will prove trouble for the Americans.  Perhaps, our displeasure with the Egyptian response should culminate in a withdrawal of some or all foreign aid and a pulling back of our support of the government.  Egypt’s actions deserve no less.  Meanwhile, the unrest throughout the region needs to be countered by those Muslims with a greater world view.  If not, Islam will be relegated to the extremists and the worst of stereotypes.  We are already moving towards that.

A Little Revolution Now and Again…

Egyptians have shaken off the dictatorship they long resented and have the political power they have long craved. Given the history of autocrats that have ruled the country since the Nasser-led coup in 1952, it is surprising that the Egyptians would vote for groups without much connection to and respect for democratic rule. The military has stepped in and commandeered the election process by suggesting that the elections were not valid given the unstable conditions of the country and the fact that not all members of Egyptian society are represented in the proportional parliament.

This is an interesting dilemma for the Obama administration. It abdicated responsibility when the Egyptian uprising began, content to lob condemnation of Mr. Mubarak from afar. Worse, after the uprising was complete, it did not see a role in helping Egyptians prepare for and conduct a proper election. Furthermore, with “Islamists” taking some two-thirds of the Egyptian parliament, the government could be in the hands of an organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, that many Western powers fear and do not trust.

The current military rulers, making up the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), is likely equally unsure about the Muslim Brotherhood and what its leadership would mean to the rule of the country, the upholding of its treaties and the threat it would pose to other countries. These threats would have to be defended by the military. Increasing the military’s unease with the recent election results is the connection between it and Western advisors over the decades.

What makes matters worse, if the West believes that the winning parties (the Muslim Brotherhood and the more conservative Nour Party) are ultimately dangerous to Egypt’s neighbors and the West’s allies, they have lost the opportunity to do anything about it. To some degree, when one pushes for democracy, you have to accept and deal with the results. Are these organizations good for Egypt? It is difficult to think so from afar but for ordinary Egyptians, they apparently think so.

The Muslim Brotherhood has had its collective noses pressed against the division between it and the power structure for decades. It has clamored for recognition and political power and now, it is on the cusp of having it. Yet, the military will not let it come easily. Will the measures of the SCAF turn the populace against the military? Will more protests and perhaps, riots, take place? If so, what role does the West play? If the U.S. and Europe come in on the side of the military, it will further ensconce our image as anti-Arab and pro-anything-that-favors-the-west.

From afar, it is difficult to trust the Muslim Brotherhood. Its intentions and its stance on Egypt’s long held treaties (more importantly with Israel) cannot be trusted. It has a record of speeches and declarations that stretches for the better part of a century that defines the organization. The Brotherhood will likely have its chance to rule and do so responsibly. I hope it rises to the challenge.