After a turbulent year, Ammar Ali Hassan* looks at the rise of Egypt's new social and political movements Egypt has never seen new social movements the like of which emerged in 2004 and early 2005. All raised the slogan of "change", and their demands were parallel to the degree of being synonymous on some points. In their persistent efforts, they followed comparable styles. Across the spectrum in terms of size, status and connection with the masses, they attempted to toss a stone into the stagnant waters of Egyptian political culture, injecting life into a regime whose arteries had atrophied, and encouraging people to practise the art of organised protest after having practically forgotten it. Life in Egypt had been reduced to filling the stomach and dodging the butchery of a massive bureaucratic- security apparatus that has carte blanche under the emergency law. No more. The new social movements were brought to life at a time when Egypt's political culture was being strangled. The elite had been purposely dispersed, while the political middlemen between the people and authorities -- parties, syndicates, associations and the like -- had been forcibly dispersed. Intellectuals had been brought into the stables, plodding in circles for ephemeral gratification, exhausted following a long and difficult journey of opposing an authority wrapped in smooth despotism, or avaricious for bureaucratic posts. They lost their historical role as a vanguard. Most partisan figures were turned into mercenaries or despots-in-training. Financial and emotive poverty towered over weak institutions, their role becoming that of mere paper podiums; places for issuing limited- distribution newspapers that nonetheless proved that the parties issuing them were still breathing. The opposition was satisfied to be mere "décor" which the ruling regime used to delude onlookers that political pluralism was alive and well, and Egypt on the path to democracy. Should some partisan figures desire to play a serious opposition role, they would find themselves either bound by a bloc of laws restricting their movement, or in confrontation with people with an intrinsic readiness to overstep law in order to crush their opponents. A climate of general or self-censorship prevailed. In addition to intellectuals and parties, a stranglehold had been placed on civil society. In Egypt, professional syndicates were nationalised following Law 100, by which the government put its oppressive hand on syndicate activity. Some syndicates had judicial supervision imposed on them, while others were barred from political activity. The assassination of all these go-betweens made reform near enough impossible, leaving authorities in sole charge of this mission. Unsurprisingly, they bent reform to their interests. Yet in addition to the assassination of intermediaries, Egypt has been witness to the organised suffocation of an entire generation. There is an "elite of mummies" that insists on holding onto positions for eternity, along with associated powers and influence. The mid-life generation attempted to materialise itself in politics via parties, the formation of associations and publications, and by establishing small businesses in the hope that they would grow over time. Returns on these efforts -- which they deserve, according to Darwin's law -- have been meagre, disgraceful even. In contrast to the embalmed elite, the mid-life generation is dying gradually. Some of its pre-eminent members have accepted marginal roles that do not actualise their potential, or help Egypt's deteriorated conditions. In a country in which more than 60 per cent of the population consists of youth, those of old age lead, while those younger suffice with waiting, watching or depression. Following a lengthy silence, the Egyptian political arena finally stirred, birthing new social movements, the first, strongest and most effective of which was the Egyptian Movement for Change (Kifaya). This movement was brought to life spontaneously, in protest over prevalent circumstances in Egypt. The movement succeeded in quickly gathering a membership of several thousands drawn from all age groups. It seeks to actualise a bundle of demands that combine means and ends, as well as ideals and realistic goals. It began working towards this by addressing the very top of the Egyptian system directly: "No to extension, no to inheritance". Arguably, this slogan and the emergence of Kifaya led to the holding of presidential elections on 7 September 2005. Now that the principle of president by election has been established, Kifaya has to draw up more comprehensive demands aimed towards the "establishment of an upright rule able to build a fair and free society that requires ending all monopolisation of wealth and power in Egypt, and all forms of political, economic and social tyranny and dominion". With attentiveness to entrenching its role as a nascent social movement, Kifaya drew up what it called an "economic programme for the future". This programme begins with rejecting current economic conditions in their entirety, seeking to actualise "domestic economic rules capable of sustainable self-growth," as well as formulating "international economic relationships for Egypt in a fair and equal manner that encourages economic growth and development."Parallel to Kifaya, the Popular Campaign for Change was born, drawing together party representatives from all political orientations, civil society organisations, syndicate memberships, intellectuals, artists and a popular base. This movement highlighted the inertia of the political regime; in particular its reliance on "the unlimited right to repeat the term of rule, and unlimited powers granted to the president of the republic by the constitution". The movement was forthright in its criticism: "After 24 years of President Mubarak's rule, it has become clear that his regime blocks the opportunities for change and development that our country needs to face the challenges confronting it. These include economic and social problems that have led to the spread of corruption, the deterioration of facilities and services, the explosion of prices, the deterioration of citizens' standards of living, and the exacerbation of unemployment, while the country simultaneously faces external challenges threatening its national security, and represented by the persistent aggressive policies of the Zionist state and the American occupation of Iraq."The birth of Kifaya and the Popular Campaign for Change led to the establishment of change movements in numerous professional syndicates -- such as those of journalists, doctors and lawyers -- as well as "Youth for Change", "Children for Change", and other groups such as "Mothers for Change". This is in addition to other social movements such as Shayfeencom, (We are watching you) which focussed its efforts on monitoring the election process, the Movement for Protecting the Rights of Voters, also known as Himaya, (Protection), which was established to combat the cooption of independents in the parliamentary elections into political parties (principally the National Democratic Party) on the basis that this swindles voters, and the Itkhanaana (We are fed up) movement, which rejects the entire ruling regime. Journalists for Change tied professional particulars to political universals: "The journalists signatory to this statement announce the founding of their movement after having endured the government and its security agencies assailing our national, partisan and private newspapers. Truth has disappeared or been altered to cover up tyranny and corruption, and newspapers have lost their credibility among readers... Egypt has slid into the dark quarter of the world's states that are marred by a lack of freedom for the press." Like the journalists, Doctors for Change stressed problems "related to practising the profession": deteriorating conditions of hospitals and treatment, "limited opportunities for serious professional activity and continued medical training, and rising unemployment. The deteriorating political, economic and social circumstances have resulted in our inability to provide appropriate healthcare to the Egyptian people among whom has spread epidemics and diseases." Their founding statement charged the ruling National Democratic Party with "attempting to undermine this grand people's ability to hold the reigns of its affairs and actualise its hopes for freedom and democracy", leading to "an unprecedented level of economic, political and social crises under the leadership of this ruling regime. "It is impermissible to degrade Egyptian citizens in any form whether through detainment, dragging them in the streets, invading the privacy of homes or violating dignity and those directly responsible must be held accountable." Doctors for Change further rejected "the superficial amendment that took place with Article 76 of the constitution and the renewal of the president of the republic's post for more than two terms. "We demand a halt to the application of the emergency law and demand the freedom to form parties and issue newspapers and publications, as well as the right to peaceful demonstration as one of the basic constitutional rights of citizens. We demand the halt of all forms of torture within prisons and detention centres and the immediate holding accountable of those responsible for such torture, as well as full judicial supervision of elections." The Students for Change movement sought to reclaim "the role of the national student movement in the formation of political life throughout Egypt's history," and secure student rights to practise political life against "security interventions in student affairs", opposing the "marginalisation of the role of the student union, forgery of elections, and the restriction of all serious political and intellectual student activities." The Writers and Artists for Change movement attempted to regain the "vanguard role of the Egyptian intellectual since the beginning of the age of the renaissance". From this starting point, it declared in its founding statement its full solidarity with the National Movement for Change and sister movements among judges, university professors, journalists, doctors, engineers and others. It also declared its desire that social struggle be peaceful. The Lawyers for Change movement outlined in its founding statement issued on 29 June 2005 the reasons for its establishment: "deteriorating living conditions and political circumstances resulting from the climate of corruption, oppression and political tyranny practised by the authorities that are clients of the Americans and Zionists and which have been perching upon the chests of the Egyptian people for more than a quarter of a century." The movement also outlined its goals in struggling for "reform and peaceful, comprehensive change of the deteriorating reality we are living, and for change of the standing constitution to become a democratic constitution in which freedom is the highest value." The Youth for Change movement sufficed with a brief statement filled with rejection and criticism without setting out specific demands. It read: "the time has come for more than 10 million unemployed to take a decisive stand against Mubarak's regime that has stripped us of our most basic rights for more than 24 years. Unemployment has killed us! The idea of forming a family has become impossible for the majority of Egypt's youth. We will not submit to resignation, and we will not fear Mubarak or his regime or his security, for we no longer have anything to lose. Mubarak has been biased towards the interests of the rich and every day confirms his affiliation to them through his insistence on disregarding the rights of the majority of the public in Egypt, who have been thrown into the core of poverty and wretchedness by his policies." As for the Children for Change movement, the issue of its first statement coincided with a demonstration it organised on 5 September 2005 before the Office of the General Attorney to demand the release of political detainees, and to announce the results of investigations into rights violations the police committed on 25 May during the referendum on Article 76 of the constitution. The "Workers Confronting Privatisation Campaign", which raised the slogan of Workers for Change, was formed as an independent workers' committee on 12 October 2005. It defined its primary goal as "confronting the new wave of privatisation and the dispersal of workers intended to be instituted in the coming stage." The committee sought to be a "core for a strong workers' movement to stand against all forms of impoverishment directed against them." The last of the new social movements was the National Front for Democratic Transformation, which was launched on 4 June 2005 under the leadership of former prime minister Aziz Sidqi. It defined the reason for its establishment as "the critical conditions Egypt is undergoing, which call for the alertness of all, and readiness to shoulder the responsibilities and outcomes of the coming stage, including offering the necessary sacrifices to assist the nation in recovering from its stumbling." The front aimed to pave the road for fair elections and to guarantee the right of political forces to form parties. It also aimed for the abrogation of all laws restricting freedoms, particularly the emergency law. In contrast to the deep-rooted rejection of Kifaya and kin among the "change movements", the National Front for Democratic Transformation was keen to assert that it was "not an alternative or competitor to any of the forces present in the political or intellectual arena." It aspired to work for "one sole issue... the realisation of the widest accord possible between forces wishing to create real, comprehensive and immediate democratic transformation in Egypt." The continuance of Kifaya and kin depends on their moving beyond spontaneity to organised political and social activity. These movements, whether public, professional or pertaining to a specific social sector, bring together a mixture of people affiliated to various ideologies and Egyptian political currents who felt at this decisive historical moment that they were in one trench and that their demands were compatible, even congruent. Yet nothing assures the absence of discord in the future, even amid the units making up each movement, if there is no force driving them towards resolve and endurance, generating real interests and making the movement's presence inevitable. The second factor required is the persistence of all that has assisted "rebellion" against the status quo, such as popular discontent resulting from relative deprivation. There is always a group of justifications, beliefs and concepts that individuals embrace and which drive them to join together. Real reform could be used, therefore, as a weapon by the ruling regime. Nothing prevents the public social movements -- and particularly Kifaya -- from turning into political parties. This may in fact be in the minds of its leaders, with evidence furnished by their determination to put forth economic and political programmes and their resolve to develop slogans and register results without relinquishing peaceful demonstration as their method, for which their movement has been distinguished above others. Such demonstration has assisted a great deal in surpassing red lines the national movement halted at previously and did not dare to cross, such as rejecting the "extension" of the presidency of the republic. It is also possible for some of these movements to transform in institutions of civil society, which is never without need for the birth of social movements. Some of these movements may prefer to stay as they are, as long as the reasons behind their establishment persist, ploughing the parched political ground and paving the road for national political forces that are not otherwise able to successfully wage the battle for reform. * The writer is director of the Centre for Middle East Studies and Research.
