Numerous impediments stand in the way of the empowerment of the Egyptian state through completing the processes outlined in the roadmap and ending the interim period that began in January 2011. Between the challenge of confronting terrorism and the difficulties of enhancing stability and security in order to realise development and fulfill the people's aspirations for social justice and human dignity, the determination to build institutions and the existence of the necessary political and social will remain the two chief determinants for the empowerment of the state. That will and determination need to be complimented by a clear vision for a building process that rests on a set of public policies that support the empowerment of the individual and society. Two processes touch directly on this: the parliamentary elections (the last stage of the roadmap) and the appointment of 17 new governors. Both events reflect the will to move forward rather than succumbing to the weight of the many threats and dangers that Egypt is experiencing. Both processes, as different as they may be in significance and impact, also reflect various dilemmas related to the responsibilities of state-building and the limits of the ability to stimulate the advancement of the state. In view of the enormous responsibilities that will fall on the upcoming parliament, its composition and the political and economic outlooks of its members will be crucial to the formulation of policies that express the priorities and needs of society and the state. This gives rise to the question of whether that parliament will reflect the current state of political and social fluidity, or whether it will reflect balances between alliances of socio-political forces, or a mixture of both, to a degree that inhibits the wheels of parliamentary work and limits its ability to act effectively. The selection of new governors was a step that had been considerably delayed due to the lack of criteria and the system for identifying candidates with high degrees of expertise and competence, as was noted by the president in the course of his discussion of the difficulty of selecting leaders. However, it is important to bear in mind the poor performance of local government in Egypt and the need to develop a local government system that is capable of mobilising resources and managing the development process in a participatory manner, as well as the continuing corruption and the lack of a framework for accountability and transparency. As a result, focusing exclusively on the performance of an individual governor will not remedy the foundations of the problem, as this requires the development of a local government law conducive to fostering efficacy and development. The line connecting the two processes is the ability to link planning and execution, which is to say to link public policies, presumably formulated by the government and approved by parliament, with their transformation into realities on the ground. The question of identifying the needs for development and marshalling the necessary social and material resources entails, firstly, the need to consider the range of policies capable of translating requirements into a basis for construction and development and, secondly, to formulate the mechanisms for putting those policies into effect. It therefore seems necessary to focus on certain principles related to the process of formulating public policy in order to overcome many of the challenges confronting Egyptian society, especially given the magnitude of these challenges which have brought that society to the threshold of a “risk society” in the negative sense of the term. Egypt today faces a gamut of serious problems, some global, such as environmental and health hazards and terrorism, others domestic, such as population growth, poverty, unemployment and other deficiencies in or threats to human security. All these need to be addressed by public policies conducive to improving the quality of life in general (policies related to education, health and social care) and supportive of empowering individuals to contribute effectively to the development of their communities, especially those that currently suffer from an inequitable distribution of the fruits of development and are deprived of essential services. It is simultaneously necessary to promote effective participation between the government, the community and the private sector in identifying needs, formulating priorities and deepening the scope of activities in addressing the problems of poverty and social and economic development. In light of the above, it is possible to identify the cornerstones upon which we should build the formulation of public policies and organise society in the manner best conducive to carrying them out. These cornerstones include the points set out below. First, there is the need to identify the relationship between the state and society, since close cooperation and interaction strengthens democratic practices and increases efficacy and efficiency in the management of resources. Since the state is responsible for economic efficiency, it helps in curbing rampant capitalism and promoting the just distribution of wealth. Second, there is the need to care for people as citizens, which entails improving services and standards of living to safeguard people's humanity and their right to a dignified life, eliminating poverty which is a chief source of current political and social deficiencies. It should be born in mind that poverty is a mirror of the extent to which people are deprived of their basic rights as citizens. Third, there is the need to build strong social institutions capable of furnishing and supporting forms or modes of sound governance that rest on transparency, oversight, liability and accountability. Fourth, there is the need to stimulate the role of civil-society organisations in the participatory development process because they form a melting pot that helps reshape perceptions and enhance the individual's awareness of the importance of community participation. They offer a framework that enables individuals to take part effectively in the formulation of development policies, and they provide an organisational interface between the grassroots of society and government. Moreover, when considering the role of civil-society organisations at this stage in particular, it is important to bear in mind the need to move beyond the phase of government intervention in the economy, which entails restructuring its relationship with society, and the need to overcome the dichotomy, or conflict, between the state and voluntary community organisations in the provision of public services, which entails policies to promote the functional assimilation of the latter into the organisational frameworks of the state. Democratic life in general requires a certain degree of coordination based on negotiation, the distribution of roles, and financial and administrative containment, all of which require promoting and strengthening public participation. Fifth, there is the need to promote the cultural factor in the participatory development process. This factor is essential in order to inculcate a set of values supportive of collective social responsibility, democracy and decentralisation. The development of a participatory culture in the process of local development is contingent on the extent to which its ideas and mechanisms become ways of life for people in their communities. The foregoing underscores the importance of the citizen who will be choosing representatives in parliament and the criteria of his/her choices which, in turn, throws into relief the question of awareness and calculating costs, especially given that a number of rules of the electoral game remain unchanged. There are the restrictions of tradition and culture that cause voting tendencies to be driven by organic affiliations and allegiances regardless of other criteria related to merit. There also remain factors related to the electoral environment and interplay, such as the role of campaign-financing, the utilisation of religion, the weakness of political parties and the polarisation between the “civil” (secular) and “religious” (Islamist) parties. In addition, most of the attempts to create political coalitions and alliances in order to overcome the current state of political and social fluidity betray a lack of political maturity, the limited ability on the part of political parties and other such organisations to assimilate diverse social and political forces, and the inability of the electoral system to translate political diversity into actual political and social representation. In short, there is a need to reorganise and reactivate political and social institutions and structures in a manner that enables them to better organise political and social interplay, strengthen stability and stimulate development. However, it is impossible to speak of empowering the citizen or society without addressing the need to empower and fortify the state. Shortcomings in this regard have exposed numerous weaknesses in government, society and citizens, all of which share the responsibility to furnish an environment conducive to the realisation of conditions for the empowerment of the state. It follows that the starting point is to identify roles, responsibilities and values, on the one hand, and to build institutions and reactivate the rule of law, on the other. The task of building the modern state, an aspiration which has been voiced by the vast majority of the people, requires a general consensus on four principle questions. The first question pertains to the degree of consensus over the substance and meaning of modern values related to freedom, tolerance and citizenship and over the means and mechanisms for applying these principles in society. The second question relates to identifying the socio-political forces that support reform and the development of the modern state, and the social, cultural and economic structures that these forces can contribute to boost democratisation and help create a climate and environment that stimulates the frameworks of social responsibility. Third comes the question of the ability to discuss the values entrenched by society and the state, the extent to which they conform to modern democratic values such as freedom, justice, transparency and accountability, and the possibilities of transforming them into an overall system of governing values imbued in the philosophy and vision of society. Finally, there is the question that relates to the ability to produce a set of precepts governing the movement of society at this historic juncture in relation to a number of changes that are taking place in society and society's relationship with the political system and political life in general. Of particular importance in this context is the need to address the factors that breed terrorism and extremist ideas and to socially isolate them, as well as the need to build the social and political institutions capable of countering the current state of chaos and polarisation by effectively organising and rationalising socio-political interplay in a manner that eliminates random fluidity and anarchy. Summoning up the political and social will to put into place the features that will create an environment friendly to reform efforts is an indispensable condition for sustaining the processes of fortifying society and the state against the weaknesses that are manifested by various domestic pressures and threats and that are exploited by foreign designs. The writer is editor-in-chief of the monthly magazine Ahwal Masriya.
