By Salama A Salama In what was for me one of Naguib Mahfouz's most deeply disturbing stories, the narrator finds himself in a sailboat when suddenly water comes rushing in on all sides. As he contemplates the roiling waters around him he is overcome by regret that he had never learned how to swim. That was not the case with his fellow passengers. One by one they jumped overboard and swam to safety. Too late he realised how much precious time he had wasted in his life, more than enough time to have learned the skill he needed to save himself. While I am not certain what Mahfouz meant by his narrative it seems to accurately depict current conditions. We have little choice but to leap into the waters of democracy and political plurality though it is only now that we realise we have wasted decades chasing after empty slogans and false dreams of glory. We passed on the opportunity to teach our people to swim. Yet other peoples, in the same totalitarian boat, have already abandoned the ship and are heading to shore. And what are we doing? There are the final rounds of a series of closed sessions between the NDP and opposition parties over the proposed amendment to Article 76 of the constitution, preparatory to its submission to the People's Assembly and Shura Council for deliberation over its final drafting, also in closed session. The general public is being treated as though political reform is none of its concern, barred even from access to information on the progress of these processes. It appears that the dialogue between the NDP and other political parties has produced very modest results. Having used its weight to set the framework for discussions, the NDP heard out the other parties, laid out its limited vision for reform and persuaded the opposition parties to back down from their positions. The first mistake the opposition parties made was to agree to a dialogue held behind closed doors where they could have their positions more easily softened. Their second mistake was to let the NDP spokesperson apprise the press of what transpired after every session, for his statements became the final word on the matter. The third was to agree to exclude representatives from one of the most influential political movements in Egypt. It was a curious concession to make, given that the government is already negotiating with the moderate Islamist movement behind everyone's back and the US and EU are in contact with its representatives. The fourth mistake was to relinquish demands for proportional representation. In agreeing to hold the forthcoming elections on the basis of individual-candidate constituencies they have voluntarily slit their own throats. Finally, after having raised such a hue and cry over the need for comprehensive constitutional reform the opposition parties agreed to just amending Article 76, settling for a promise that other constitutional shortcomings would be addressed at some unspecified later date. What has the opposition gained? One can only suppose that deals were struck over the political parties law which, after it is amended, will give some opposition parties a small advantage along the lines of a certain percentage of seats in the new parliament and perhaps an increase in the level of funding to political parties. They may have had other demands met, too, such as equal access to the official media and the loosening - not the abolition - of emergency laws, on condition, of course, that they do not enter into any alliance with illegal political movements and support the final wording of the amendment to Article 76. The opposition parties may think they have climbed to the top of the tree. Now they are about to fall off, without ever having tasted the fruit.
