"Parallels between Mubarak and Pinochet?
In Egypt there are favorable conditions for a democratization process with a civic and secular imprint. Transitions in Latin America can provide clues and interesting examples of the Egyptians
Sergio Bitar
transitions from dictatorship to democracy have certain common features. The South American transition can serve the Egyptian. I had the opportunity to observe the first time live, with the eyes of the entire Chilean transition lived and was invited to present their lessons. I met with leaders of major political and social forces in Cairo, and I had a lot of questions that allowed me to establish the existence of relevant parallel.
The two most feared risk, lawlessness and fundamentalism seem to me improbable
In Egypt can serve the Chilean experience of a coalition of democratic forces
At first glance, one tends to dismiss the similarities. There are traditions democratic and very different institutional, religious influence in Egypt in complex ways in politics, Copts, Sunnis and Shiites must balance their cohabitation, it is a sensitive strategic area, with Israel on its borders and oil in the Eyes of the West. However, there are substantive similarities.
I dare say that in Egypt there are favorable conditions for a democratization process, with a civic and secular imprint. The course seems irreversible. It opened a huge river city for freedom and dignity, to change the skyline as possible in the minds of the Egyptians. Here the parallels are worth. After Tahrir, which ended the Government Mubarak, and the plebiscite that Pinochet said no, keep open process similarity.
The two risks most feared-a turn to fundamentalism or lawlessness seem to me improbable. Regarding the former, the Muslim Brotherhood have reiterated their decision to become as a party, until now banned, not presidential candidates, integrate a coalition for free elections and participate in a transitional government. Just split a group (Wasat). Egypt frequently stated that they can win elections by being the most organized. You may grow initially, but different is to be movement that game, and then compete with several other options, free. As the risk of poor governance, armed forces are organized, powerful and appreciated by the public. Egypt has a more consolidated state, a judiciary with autonomy and institutions capable of governing.
I think the danger is another: a stagnation of the transition by the weakness and dispersion of the emerging forces. And here comes a first parallel: successful transitions to form broad coalitions managed democracy. The future of Egyptian democracy depend on the ability to form such a coalition. There are many small and weak parties, without coordination and territorial jurisdictions, and groups of young leaders with no permanent joint and a declining capacity for mobilization. They can push but not driving. Young social leaders, men and women, represent an inspirational source of the revolution. They are a new generation, more educated and democratic culture. His knowledge of communication technologies can be an important innovation for the dissemination of ideas. The quality of Egyptian transition will depend on how they come together and preserve this unique feature of the transition: the active citizen participation. In these areas there is room to share experiences in South America, Southern Europe, Central Europe, Indonesia and Turkey.
Coalitions born to face a transition usually focus on three immediate goals: conditions for free and fair elections, electoral agreement to elect a majority in Congress and support the first democratic government. If they succeed, then they turn to strategic issues, giving priority to strengthening institutions, economic growth and social inclusion. This process has just begun in Egypt and can accelerate. There are certain rules and procedures, and tested, which may be part of an international collaboration.
A second critical issue is the relationship with the military. In Egypt the military accompanied the "revolution", not favored or prevented. Have performed the first referendum to approve constitutional amendments and set a timetable for elections of parliament and president in 2011. Proposals have commissioned new Electoral Law and Political Parties Law. Is a positive, compared with South American dictatorships. In South America, the transition was initiated against military dictatorships.
While acknowledging the difference in the role of the military in Egypt and Chile, a second parallel. Upon leaving, in both countries was either total power in the hands of the armed forces and, when the civilian counterpart is weak military forces could extend their presence in government, engaging in the daily management, which is random. A smooth transition is the progressive withdrawal of the Armed Forces of the management of government. Can only provide a democratizing force capable of a valid negotiation between civilian and military partners. A coalition with one voice is essential.
civil-military relationship must point to the military subordination to civilian authority and deal with two complex issues. The first is public demand for justice (human rights violation and corruption). Soon to be institutionalized, with bodies such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established in Chile and replicated in South Africa years later, and then let the investigations in the hands of the judiciary. Sanctions should be exemplary, even resorting to international courts to prevent and deter its repetition returns to the political arena. This is a great lesson from South America. The other issue for a military policy in a transition is to assure adequate funding to meet and comply with their professional duties.
A third parallel is the participation of the democratic coalition in the formation of a voting block that matches a government program, choose and then give support in Parliament to the first democratic government. In Egypt the speed of events has been very quick to make it on time, but the sooner the better article. New demands emerge very quickly and the opponents did not let up. Do not just choose a good president, must be given support to govern well and thus legitimize the transition.
In this area it is worth emphasizing two lessons simply transposed to exercise the first government: need to ensure public order and implement a credible and sustainable economic program. Public policy must be guaranteed to dispel fear. Fear plays against the changes. The police must be reoriented, moving from harassment to protect people. In Egypt, the priority order to restore tourism, a major employer. The outflow of capital or increase in unemployment should be anticipated. Successful transitions have to build trust with sound macroeconomic policies, special employment programs, while gradually supplementing social safety net. In these areas, South America has useful experience. However, success requires innovative thinking and fast to multinational financial institutions, notably the IMF and World Bank to help overcome the reduction of reserves and the fiscal deficit. It would be understandable act promptly to resolve a financial crisis in developed nations and leniency to attend the launch of a democracy in a developing country, vital in the region.
Chile and Egypt are different, Mubarak and Pinochet as well. But there common features in the transitions, and an exchange of experiences in South America, Europe, Asia, saying what worked and what did not, you can make a difference. The Egyptian revolution is a great hope for democracy and peace in the world. As events in Tunisia spread like wind, so the Egyptian example can spread fast. To this must have the support of all true democrats.
Sergio Bitar, Chilean politician, was Minister of Allende. After suffering imprisonment and exile during the dictatorship, helped create the coalition and former minister of President Lagos and Bachelet. He is currently a visiting senior fellow at the Inter American Dialogue, Washington.
In Egypt there are favorable conditions for a democratization process with a civic and secular imprint. Transitions in Latin America can provide clues and interesting examples of the Egyptians
Sergio Bitar
transitions from dictatorship to democracy have certain common features. The South American transition can serve the Egyptian. I had the opportunity to observe the first time live, with the eyes of the entire Chilean transition lived and was invited to present their lessons. I met with leaders of major political and social forces in Cairo, and I had a lot of questions that allowed me to establish the existence of relevant parallel.
The two most feared risk, lawlessness and fundamentalism seem to me improbable
In Egypt can serve the Chilean experience of a coalition of democratic forces
At first glance, one tends to dismiss the similarities. There are traditions democratic and very different institutional, religious influence in Egypt in complex ways in politics, Copts, Sunnis and Shiites must balance their cohabitation, it is a sensitive strategic area, with Israel on its borders and oil in the Eyes of the West. However, there are substantive similarities.
I dare say that in Egypt there are favorable conditions for a democratization process, with a civic and secular imprint. The course seems irreversible. It opened a huge river city for freedom and dignity, to change the skyline as possible in the minds of the Egyptians. Here the parallels are worth. After Tahrir, which ended the Government Mubarak, and the plebiscite that Pinochet said no, keep open process similarity.
The two risks most feared-a turn to fundamentalism or lawlessness seem to me improbable. Regarding the former, the Muslim Brotherhood have reiterated their decision to become as a party, until now banned, not presidential candidates, integrate a coalition for free elections and participate in a transitional government. Just split a group (Wasat). Egypt frequently stated that they can win elections by being the most organized. You may grow initially, but different is to be movement that game, and then compete with several other options, free. As the risk of poor governance, armed forces are organized, powerful and appreciated by the public. Egypt has a more consolidated state, a judiciary with autonomy and institutions capable of governing.
I think the danger is another: a stagnation of the transition by the weakness and dispersion of the emerging forces. And here comes a first parallel: successful transitions to form broad coalitions managed democracy. The future of Egyptian democracy depend on the ability to form such a coalition. There are many small and weak parties, without coordination and territorial jurisdictions, and groups of young leaders with no permanent joint and a declining capacity for mobilization. They can push but not driving. Young social leaders, men and women, represent an inspirational source of the revolution. They are a new generation, more educated and democratic culture. His knowledge of communication technologies can be an important innovation for the dissemination of ideas. The quality of Egyptian transition will depend on how they come together and preserve this unique feature of the transition: the active citizen participation. In these areas there is room to share experiences in South America, Southern Europe, Central Europe, Indonesia and Turkey.
Coalitions born to face a transition usually focus on three immediate goals: conditions for free and fair elections, electoral agreement to elect a majority in Congress and support the first democratic government. If they succeed, then they turn to strategic issues, giving priority to strengthening institutions, economic growth and social inclusion. This process has just begun in Egypt and can accelerate. There are certain rules and procedures, and tested, which may be part of an international collaboration.
A second critical issue is the relationship with the military. In Egypt the military accompanied the "revolution", not favored or prevented. Have performed the first referendum to approve constitutional amendments and set a timetable for elections of parliament and president in 2011. Proposals have commissioned new Electoral Law and Political Parties Law. Is a positive, compared with South American dictatorships. In South America, the transition was initiated against military dictatorships.
While acknowledging the difference in the role of the military in Egypt and Chile, a second parallel. Upon leaving, in both countries was either total power in the hands of the armed forces and, when the civilian counterpart is weak military forces could extend their presence in government, engaging in the daily management, which is random. A smooth transition is the progressive withdrawal of the Armed Forces of the management of government. Can only provide a democratizing force capable of a valid negotiation between civilian and military partners. A coalition with one voice is essential.
civil-military relationship must point to the military subordination to civilian authority and deal with two complex issues. The first is public demand for justice (human rights violation and corruption). Soon to be institutionalized, with bodies such as the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established in Chile and replicated in South Africa years later, and then let the investigations in the hands of the judiciary. Sanctions should be exemplary, even resorting to international courts to prevent and deter its repetition returns to the political arena. This is a great lesson from South America. The other issue for a military policy in a transition is to assure adequate funding to meet and comply with their professional duties.
A third parallel is the participation of the democratic coalition in the formation of a voting block that matches a government program, choose and then give support in Parliament to the first democratic government. In Egypt the speed of events has been very quick to make it on time, but the sooner the better article. New demands emerge very quickly and the opponents did not let up. Do not just choose a good president, must be given support to govern well and thus legitimize the transition.
In this area it is worth emphasizing two lessons simply transposed to exercise the first government: need to ensure public order and implement a credible and sustainable economic program. Public policy must be guaranteed to dispel fear. Fear plays against the changes. The police must be reoriented, moving from harassment to protect people. In Egypt, the priority order to restore tourism, a major employer. The outflow of capital or increase in unemployment should be anticipated. Successful transitions have to build trust with sound macroeconomic policies, special employment programs, while gradually supplementing social safety net. In these areas, South America has useful experience. However, success requires innovative thinking and fast to multinational financial institutions, notably the IMF and World Bank to help overcome the reduction of reserves and the fiscal deficit. It would be understandable act promptly to resolve a financial crisis in developed nations and leniency to attend the launch of a democracy in a developing country, vital in the region.
Chile and Egypt are different, Mubarak and Pinochet as well. But there common features in the transitions, and an exchange of experiences in South America, Europe, Asia, saying what worked and what did not, you can make a difference. The Egyptian revolution is a great hope for democracy and peace in the world. As events in Tunisia spread like wind, so the Egyptian example can spread fast. To this must have the support of all true democrats.
Sergio Bitar, Chilean politician, was Minister of Allende. After suffering imprisonment and exile during the dictatorship, helped create the coalition and former minister of President Lagos and Bachelet. He is currently a visiting senior fellow at the Inter American Dialogue, Washington.
0 comments:
Post a Comment