Since arriving to a hero’s welcome late last month, the former chief international nuclear watchdog and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mohammed ElBaradei has taken on Egypt’s leadership in the way you might expect of a career diplomat: using delicate language and a non-confrontational approach.
For all the gentle words, however, his whirlwind interviews made it clear that he had come home to shake up the leadership’s long monopoly on power, even as he continued to dance around the question of whether he would run for president.
His message as he dominated the media was a call for Egyptians to press their government for more political freedoms, a provocation in a country where dissent is hardly tolerated and where a viable political opposition has not been allowed to grow. His point was this: Without amending the constitution to allow fully free elections, Egypt could not improve any of the deep social and economic problems that had been allowed to fester under the governing party.
“My goal is that there wouldn’t be one savior for Egypt,” he said in a three-hour TV interview shortly after he arrived. “My goal is for Egypt to save itself. Help me in order to help you. If you want this country to change, then every one of you must participate to show his desire.”
It is hard to say where ElBaradei’s headfirst plunge into Egyptian politics will lead. He has given voice to the frustration with Egypt’s political, social and economic stagnation in a way that had not been seen since a brief, measured political thaw in 2005. But his early support appears to be primarily among intellectuals and young people, and analysts have questioned whether he will be able to broaden that appeal.
RULING PARTY SHAKEN
If anything concrete has so far emerged from his challenge, political analysts said, it appears that the governing party may be shaken enough that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak will consider running for president again when his term expires in 2011.
There had been widespread speculation that Mubarak, who is 81 and has governed for nearly 29 years, was grooming his younger son, Gamal, to be the candidate of the governing National Democratic Party. But the thinking now is that the younger Mubarak’s credentials could not match ElBaradei’s.
The signs that the elder Mubarak might be changing his mind: He has visited regions around the country recently and the state-run media have begun referencing his electoral platform.
“ElBaradei constitutes a real challenge,” said Mustapha Kamel El Sayed, a political science professor at American University in Cairo. “Not necessarily in terms of his capacity to win an election against the candidate of the National Democratic Party, but in terms of the superiority of his prestige and the respect he has domestically and internationally.”
UNIQUE CHALLENGE
In 2005, under pressure from Washington, the Egyptian government made some effort to improve political freedoms, and the next year it allowed challengers to run against the president in his bid for re-election. Previously the president had run in single candidate “referendums.”
Soon after, however, the political opening evaporated, and in 2007 the state pushed through amendments to the Constitution that effectively made it harder for independents to run for office.
ElBaradei has called on the state to change the Constitution again, a pragmatic first step since under existing law he is unlikely to qualify to run — a fact that he has used, subtly, to embarrass the state.
His decision to plunge into politics presents the government with a unique challenge. He is a former insider, a diplomat who once worked for the foreign service and who hails from the cadre of political elite now in charge.
“He is not a radical and he is not going to change the country’s direction 180 degrees,” said Amr El-Shobaki, a political analyst at the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. “At the same time, he reveals their mismanagement, the absence of democracy, the arbitrariness of the regime.”
ElBaradei, 67, left his post in December as director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Along with the nuclear agency, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005. In December, as speculation about ElBaradei’s possible candidacy surfaced, the state media began to attack him. But in the past few weeks, they have largely ignored him, even as he has received tremendous attention from independent media.
If there was any indication of how the governing party might challenge ElBaradei, it was in a front-page opinion piece written by Abdel Moneim Said, chairman of Al Ahram, which publishes the state-owned and widely circulated newspaper of the same name. His article effectively said that while ElBaradei called for change, his ideas were not new, and that many of his facts about the challenges Egypt faces were wrong.
Few expect that to be where the effort to block ElBaradei ends.
“The regime that controls this country is very smart and cunning and sly, and he who thinks otherwise is under an illusion and naive, or it wouldn’t have preserved such a large nation in the refrigerator of stillness and subservience for 30 years,” Magdy el Gallad wrote in the Feb. 23 issue of the independent daily newspaper al-Masry Al-Youm. “As such, it knows how to deal with each opponent or competitor or opposition in a special and different way.”
The only remaining question, Gallad said, was: “How then will the ruling regime burn Mohammed ElBaradei?”
ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY MONA EL-NAGGAR
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS