Are the opposition parties really all that opposed to the ruling National Democratic Party, asks Gamal Essam El-Din Just as Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit was being grilled by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice regarding the "the American Administration, Congress and People ['s]" concerns over the arrest of Ayman Nour, opposition leaders were joining forces with the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) back in Cairo to lambaste "foreign powers for meddling in Egypt's internal political affairs". The irony of that situation was not lost on observers like Mohamed El-Sayed Said of Al- Ahram's Political and Strategic Studies Centre, who said that "the US that the NDP mobilised the opposition against [at the national dialogue], is the same US that gives NDP governments almost $2 billion in economic and military assistance every year, and with whom these governments are trying their best to conclude a free trade agreement." According to Said, "when the US is a source of help, it's in the NDP's good books, but when it comes to reform, change and democratisation, it becomes a source of evil that all forces must be mobilised against." Thus, what was supposed to be a national dialogue about the details of a homegrown reform process turned more into a harangue meant to mobilise the opposition against foreign reform calls. The ruling party's leadership argued that the condemnation of foreign meddling was first brought up by six of the opposition parties taking part in the dialogue. In any case, it appeared to be the fruit of a deal; in exchange for their rubber-stamp approval of the NDP's stand against foreign meddling, opposition leaders got two modest promises: that President Hosni Mubarak might reconsider drafting a few articles of the constitution; and that the NDP may loosen its grip on the forthcoming parliamentary elections. The pro-government press heaped praise on the opposition for their stance: Samir Ragab, editor of NDP mouthpiece Mayo, dubbed them "really reliable men". What seemed less reliable, however, was when and if the opposition's calls for amending the constitution would ever see the light. For one thing, not all of the parties agreed on the timing. A Shura Council report indicated that ten parties (including the NDP and nine of the smaller opposition parties) agreed to delay amending the constitution until 2006, or at least after the presidential referendum and parliamentary elections are held this fall. Three parties -- Al-Tagammu, Al-Wafd and the Constitutional -- said a national committee should be set up as soon as possible to take charge of the constitutional re-drafting task. Only two parties -- the Nasserists and Al-Ghad (Tomorrow) -- felt there was still enough time to re-draft the constitution ahead of the next presidential poll. According to the report, the NDP is the only party that does not agree on the necessity of electing the president and vice president of the republic in a multi-candidate direct poll, and limiting them to two five-year terms in office. Other proposals presented to the NDP include abrogating the constitutional stipulation that 50 per cent of People's Assembly and Shura Council seats be reserved for workers and farmers. The opposition also wants the Shura Council to be granted full supervisory and legislative powers within a complete and vigorous bicameral system with two powerful chambers. An Al-Wafd proposal calls for the Cassation Court -- instead of the People's Assembly -- being empowered with the final say on election appeals. NDP Secretary-General Safwat El-Sherif said there were no "red lines" when it came to political and constitutional reform. Gamal Mubarak, the president's son and chairman of the NDP's powerful Policies Committee, indicated that the ruling party believes that the constitution has to be amended to reflect changes in society, and that "it is up to President Mubarak to give the final say on this. We believe that economic reform can never be complete without political and constitutional reform," Gamal Mubarak told an NDP meeting in Beheira governorate last Thursday. Despite these optimistic statements, last week's second round of the dialogue -- first proposed by President Mubarak in September 2003 -- seemed to cement its emergence as more of an NDP platform to mobilise opposition parties into rejecting broad reform initiatives. On 17 February, El-Sherif announced that opposition leaders agreed to leave anything related to presidential power out of the amendments to be discussed. "Opposition leaders," said El-Sherif, "emphasised their very high regard for President Mubarak, and that his final say on constitutional amendments will be binding for everybody, because President Mubarak puts Egypt's national interests above all considerations." Meanwhile, a committee -- including Al- Wafd and Al-Tagammu leaders Noaman Gomaa and Rifaat El-Said and NDP Assistant Secretary-General Kamal El-Shazli -- met on Monday to prepare for the dialogue's third round. According to El-Shazli, the committee grappled with the opposition's proposals on overhauling the 1956 law on the exercise of political rights, establishing an independent national electoral commission to monitor parliamentary polls, and getting rid of the Political Parties Committee that currently provides licences for political activity. Amongst the specific debates: whether the slate, or group, system (which obligates party candidates to run collectively on a single ticket or slate in each constituency) should be switched to an individual system. NDP officials, meanwhile, said they were looking into establishing a "charter of ethics" with opposition parties, with the objective of regulating electoral campaigns. Gomaa said the opposition parties were hoping for a positive response to some of these proposals from the NDP so that the opposition would have a greater voice in internal politics, "instead of lending their ears to foreign powers".
