Was the Tahrir Square revolution really the beginning of military rule in Egypt?
The background
The second round of Egypt’s first free presidential elections was overshadowed by news that the country’s interim military rulers have moved to extend their authority. After the polls closed on Sunday 17th June, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) issued a constitutional declaration that “effectively gives it legislative powers, control over the budget and over who writes the permanent constitution”, reported the BBC. The declaration also strips the president of control of the military and gives SCAF members jobs for life. Opposition activists branded the military declaration a “coup”.
The move comes just days after SCAF controversially dissolved the Egyptian parliament. On Monday 18th June, MPs were prevented from entering parliament by soldiers following a supreme court ruling that the 2011 elections were unconstitutional.
The two remaining presidential candidates have both declared victory in the run-off vote: Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood and Ahmed Shafiq, Prime Minister under deposed president Hosni Mubarak. But with the latest extension of military powers, does the result even matter?
Read more about Egypt’s historic presidential elections at The Periscope Post.
New constitution ‘completes the coup’
“The supplementary constitutional declaration really does complete the coup in many obvious ways,” wrote Nathan Brown at Arabist. Essentially, the declaration “returning martial law (in its more original sense rather than the ‘state of emergency’ that just expired), making the military unaccountable, and grabbing back oversight of the political system for the military just weeks before the scheduled end of military rule”.
Military power grab overshadows elections
“There is a distinct lack of energy or enthusiasm surrounding this vote,” reported Sherine Tadros for Al Jazeera, having visited several Egyptian polling stations. According to Tadros, for many Egyptian voters, this “deep seated depression surrounding the vote comes from the realization that whoever wins, it’s the military rulers or SCAF that will end up running the country”. The real political battle is not between the Muslim Brotherhood and “Mubarak’s man”, said Tadros; “what is determining Egypt’s future is not happening at the polls”.
The Wall Street Journal‘s Charles Levinson tweeted from the SCAF press conference that the military leaders claim the constitutional declaration has been “blown out of proportion”.
SCAF: “We want a little more trust in us. Stop all the criticisms that we are a state within a state. Please. Stop.”
— Charles Levinson (@levinsonc) June 18, 2012
Egypt must unite against military
“To continue to declare a plague on both their houses, meaning both the military and the Brotherhood, is not just self-indulgence,” said David Hearst at The Guardian’s Comment is Free. “It is political folly, wherever you are on the secular or religious spectrum.” The Muslim Brotherhood may have made mistakes, but like it or not, the party “can not be said to lack democratic legitimacy in Egypt”.
Electoral victory is crucial for Muslim Brotherhood
SCAF’s decision to dissolve parliament means the Muslim Brotherhood has now lost a vital political foothold, wrote Kristen Chick for The Christian Science Monitor. This means a win for Morsi in the presidential elections is even more important to the movement’s political survival. “If Mr. Shafiq wins, many in the once-banned organization fear a return to the days of ousted President Hosni Mubarak, when Brotherhood members were often arrested in their homes and detained for years,” Chick said.
