Slight Note on the Egyptian Election

Watching the returns of the Egyptian presidential elections in Europe, I was struck by the difference in reactions from the United States and England. A British panel basically discussed how the Egyptians had experienced voter fatigue after voting in several free elections and that the choice in the presidential election was between two bland, dull uninspiring candidates. The British commentators suggested, not without cause, that the delay in the announcement of the results was because of back channel discussions between the army and all the political parties to ensure a peaceful result. 


The American commentators stressed concerns about whether the winner would ensure the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty and whether the Egyptian people would accept the outcome, suggesting that the delay might be the result of cooking the books.


The overseas CNN broadcast had the endless statement of the head of the Electoral Commission. This was the deadliest hour statement you can imagine. The head of the Electoral Commission first defended himself from the abuse he received from all parties and the accusations challenging his integrity. The second part of his statement consisted of detailing each polling place where some votes were annulled and why. The total amount was actually minuscule compared to the whole turnout. By this time CNN commentators were cutting in and out discussing when the result would be announced as Egyptians headed to Tahir Square.


The importance of the Egyptian election can not be overstated. This was the first democratic presidential election in the modern history of Egypt. The criticism by those who spearheaded the toppling of the Mubarak regime was that this devolved into a contest between the Moslem Brotherhood, which had no primary role in the events 18 months ago, and Hosni Mubarak's last prime minister Ahmed Shafiq. This was precisely the paradigm the people of Tahir Square was trying to change.


As for our friend at the Electoral Commission, he resembled all presidents of such commissions when they have to publicly announce the results--all technical aspects of the election and the result for them is secondary. His statement was to assert the commission's transparency and to set out the argument to refute any challenges to the electoral process itself.


The British commentators were perceptive that there was electoral fatigue. Only 51% of Egyptian's 50 million voters cast their ballots. In other words, the electoral climate was normalized like in the U.S., which barely surpasses that turnout in the Presidential election, with the exception of 2008. Mohammed Morsi , the candidate for the Moslem Brotherhood's party, won with 52%, which should be seen as a positive,showing that there exists a large democratic opposition to his victory. 


Morsi was educated in the United States and had been a professor of engineering in California. Both his daughters are American citizens. Morsi resigned from the Moslem Brotherhood just before the final tally and has promised to create a national unity government. He has floated the possibility of a leftwing woman as a Vice President and a Christian as another Vice President.  While he has said vicious things about the Jewish people, he has openly committed himself to upholding the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty but deeds will be more important than words.


The fact of the matter is that the President has very little power. His authority is not defined constitutionally and the military holds all the effective power. While Morsi promises a democratic system and a respect for all different elements in society and the rule of law, this will be a real challenge for American policy.


The United States provides Egypt with the lion's share of its aid. But the lion's share of that is for military aid, which is dependent on the Egypt-Israeli Treaty. 


The problem is the same for many of the countries of the Arab Spring. The United States must deal with the emergence of the most organized element in these societies which have been repressed, while the drivers of change lack the effective organizational capability to participate to the full extent of their influence. In essence, the Arab Spring has resulted in groups like the Moslem Brotherhood emerging as dominant players while the secular forces emerge weakened once we get into a democratic process. The problem for the United States is that it has too heavily relied on the military component of its foreign aid and has not developed a sophisticated approach to strengthening the liberal components of the civil society so it can compete with the more reactionary elements.