Those who hoped for a new era of peaceful democracy following the Arab Spring demonstrations in Egypt, especially as they led to the resignation of president Hosni Mubarak, will be troubled by the latest news from the country. The hope and anticipation for upcoming elections to replace current parliament members and ousted president Hosni Mubarak have given way to violence and riots, leading the nation’s 26 Cabinet members to resign and throwing into question the relationship between Egypt’s government and its interim military council, whose power appears to be growing rapidly.
Egypt’s cabinet resigned amid deadly clashes between police and protesters demanding political change that have killed 26 and prompted the ruling military to call for crisis talks.
On the eve of a new wave of protests planned for later Tuesday, the cabinet announced its resignation on the third day of protests that have triggered Egypt’s worst crisis since president Hosni Mubarak was toppled in February.
Two people were killed early Tuesday in the Red Sea town of Ismailiya, medics said, bringing the toll of clashes since Saturday to 26.
“The government of Prime Minister Essam Sharaf has handed its resignation to the (ruling) Supreme Council of the Armed Forces,” cabinet spokesman Mohammed Hegazy said in a statement Monday.
State television quoted a military source as saying the ruling military council had rejected the resignation, but Information Minister Osama Heikal told the official MENA news agency the matter had not yet been decided.
Sharaf’s resignation, if accepted, threatens to derail parliamentary elections scheduled for November 28 — the first polls since Mubarak’s downfall.
—-
—-
The youth groups that engineered the 18-day uprising against Mubarak that began Jan. 25 have been squeezed out, marginalized and isolated.
“We should not have left the streets. We handed power to the military on a silver platter,” said Ahmed Imam, a 33-year-old activist, of the January uprising. “The revolutionaries went home too soon. We collected the spoils and left before the battle was over.”
Months of anger over the military’s handling of the transition period boiled over this weekend, sparking deadly clashes in Cairo’s Tahrir Square that left at least 12 protesters dead and hundreds wounded.
The demonstrators were initially demanding the military quickly announce a date for the handover of power to a civilian government, but the mood shifted Sunday after an attempt by security forces to clear the square. Now, protesters say the ruling generals are nothing more than an extension of the Mubarak regime, and are calling on military ruler Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi and his council of generals to step down in favor of an interim civilian administration.
Elections to choose the first post-revolution parliament, starting on Nov. 28, promise to be the nation’s first fair and clean vote in living memory. But instead of a sense of joy and excitement, Egyptians seem more thrown into confusion. The electoral system is cumbersome and complex and voting is spread out over months. Many are unclear over who is running.
Islamic fundamentalist parties–particularly the powerful Muslim Brotherhood–are expected to come out the biggest winners in the vote and grab a plurality of parliament seats. But no matter who wins, there are doubts whether the next government to be formed will be strong enough to challenge the ruling generals, who will remain in place and have resisted major reform.
Already, the military is seeking to manage the main priority for the next parliament–the formation of a panel to write a new constitution. The ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has demanded a political role for themselves as “protectors” of the constitution, provisions that would keep the military budget secret and a veto power over the body drafting the constitution.
When a president is elected–a vote is initially set for late next year or early in 2013–the occupant of the land’s highest office is likely to be beholden to the generals, either because he will have a military background or because they may by then have more sweeping powers than him.