SPEAKING FREELY
My enemy's enemy is my enemy
By Shadi Hamid

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

Last Sunday's events in the heart of Cairo served as a tragic reminder of what Egyptians already know so well - that their country, despite recent protestations to the contrary, remains stubbornly authoritarian. The Egyptian regime from the early 1950s until this very day has pegged its survival on its uncanny ability to create a stifling culture of fear and paranoia. And so it was on Sunday.

The government of President Hosni Mubarak, in the face of a small but unprecedented Muslim Brotherhood protest calling for constitutional reforms, brought in thousands of troops and blocked off all the major thoroughfares in the bustling Tahrir area. During the protest itself, about 150 participants were detained for "refusing to disperse", while earlier in the day, 84 Muslim Brothers, some of them high-ranking leaders, were arrested for "possession of books and publications opposed to the system of government".

In the past few months, regular protests calling for democratic reform have taken place, led usually by secularists, leftists and civil-society leaders. The Kifaya movement, with its catchy public relations, has gained widespread press coverage for starting a burgeoning anti-Mubarak movement. The Kifaya rallies, though, never drew the kind of aggressive security response that the Brotherhood rally did, leading Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Mahdi Akef to wonder: "The communists organized a demonstration, the Kifaya Movement ... had a demonstration ... so why this with us?"

Of course, this was just a rhetorical question, for surely Akef knows the answer. The Brotherhood remains the only mass movement in a country of 70 million, with grassroots support and the street credibility that secular elites so evidently lack. Knowing the power and influence of the Brotherhood, the Mubarak regime has been very wary of Islamist political participation, which is why they have been conspicuously absent from the recently state-initiated "national dialogue".

As Mohamed Alwan, an member of parliament from the secular Wafd party, noted, the Brotherhood "owns the political street". One high-ranking Brotherhood member I spoke to remarked that the Brotherhood was capable of mobilizing more than 50,000 people to protest, but for the time being had chosen to avoid drawing the wrath of the regime. The Brotherhood is well aware that a more proactive, confrontational approach would inevitably invite a brutal, unforgiving anti-Islamist campaign from the government, bringing back haunting memories of former president Gamal Abdel Nasser's notorious prisons.

What, then, is the hope for Egypt's fractious opposition of Islamists, leftists, secularists and civil society leaders? For too long, the Egyptian government has tamed the opposition through a surprisingly effective policy of divide and conquer. Different ideological groupings must, therefore, sit down, bury the hatchet, and come up with a broad-based reform program that will be acceptable to all Egyptians, regardless of religious orientation. If the Brotherhood continues to act alone, it will continue being an easy target for government crackdowns. If leftists and secularists continue to freeze the Brotherhood out of the Kifaya movement, they will fail to attract a mass following, and a mass following is the only thing that will force the Mubarak government to consider real democratic reform.

For its part, the administration of US President George W Bush proved last month that it was indeed serious about democracy, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice canceling a planned trip to Cairo in protest at the Egyptian government's arrest of Ayman Nour, the leader of the newly formed, secular al-Ghad party. The question is whether the US supports the democratic rights of not only secularists but also of the Muslim Brotherhood. Not surprisingly, the State Department was silent after Sunday's arrests, reinforcing accusations of US hypocrisy and inconsistency.

The advent of Arab democracy is inevitable. The question is not if, but how and when. The US must figure out what it wants: managed democratization in which Mubarak or his son's rule is legitimized through sham elections, or genuine progress toward a new order, a la Lebanon or Iraq. Both options are fraught with difficulties and risks. Yet if the Bush administration truly wants to follow through with its pledge to rid the region of authoritarianism, the choice at hand should be a clear one.

As the recent examples of Iraq and Turkey (and Algeria in 1991) have shown us, free and fair elections will likely result in Islamists winning a plurality, if not a majority, of the vote. The US should prepare itself for this probable eventuality by initiating a frank, open and sustained dialogue with moderate Islamists. There are of course concerns, some of them justified, regarding Islamist commitment to women's rights, protection of minorities and alternation of power. With this in mind, the US should promote Islamist participation in free elections only in the context of an official framework - for example a national charter - which would clearly outline the rules of the game and guarantee freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and equal rights for women and minorities regardless of which party, religious or secular, came to power.

Dealing with ideological parties is tricky and not something successive US administrations have proved particularly adept at. For too long now fear of Islamists has remained a perpetual stumbling block in efforts to promote democracy in the Middle East. In the coming critical months, the situation in Egypt may very well escalate. Hesitation and silent neutrality will no longer suffice. If the US is in fact waging a war against autocracy, it must leave no doubt as to which side it's fighting on.

Shadi Hamid is a Fulbright Fellow in Amman, Jordan, conducting research on Islamist participation in the democratic process.

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.