A dynamic reform process requires an end to quibbling, writes Ibrahim Nafie In spite of the government's intensive efforts to put a comprehensive vision for reform into effect grumbling from various quarters grows ever louder. If only the criticisms were well founded. Instead, all we hear is the constant whine of inexplicable suspicion. Even as the average citizen is already beginning to reap the fruits of reform, these critics greet every step taken by the government with knee-jerk howls. "It won't work!" "It's a step backwards for democracy!" Such is their determination not to see the facts that when the government introduces measures to bring down prices and stimulate the market, they cry out, "Inflationary!" So insistent are they upon the existence of some kind of conspiracy that when the government strives to keep an even keel between reform and stability they protest that the government is favouring some vested interest group. While they avow that reform must be comprehensive, they reduce the entire array of economic, social, political and cultural reform issues to a single battle cry: "Amend the constitution first!" Such confirmed negativism is well past its sell- by date. It is high time that people take reform seriously. Only by making our criticisms or suggestions as constructive, objective and realistic as possible can we ensure that reform remains a dynamic, forward moving process, capable of taking on board a diversity of viewpoints. Certainly we must agree that if reform is to mobilise our latent energies in order to raise our country to the ranks of emerging nations it must be comprehensive and balanced. This is the type of reform process the government of Ahmed Nazif has set into motion. It is not a reform process founded upon idle promises and rosy assessments, but rather on a spirit of diligence, frankness and transparency. Epitomising this new and fresh approach the prime minister told Al-Ahram on Friday: "We will create realistic solutions. Sometimes these solutions will have side effects... but the people will accept them... This is because we realise how important it is to be open with the people. By making clear what is and what is not possible, people will ultimately become convinced and their confidence will increase." What we need is to press ahead. We must put aside idle theorising over whether economic reform should precede political and social reform, or vice versa, because such chicken-before-the- egg debates have only caused other reform experiences to flounder. Rather, we must take our cue from those nations that proceeded on the premise that the various spheres of reform are intertwined. These are the nations that were able to embark on ambitious, but balanced, reform programmes that succeeded in bringing their countries forward, without great disruption and without leaving sectors behind to drag the whole process down. Clearly Nazif has taken the cue. In his interview with Al-Ahram he said: "We are moving in all directions simultaneously -- the political, the economic and the social. We cannot proceed in one of these areas without proceeding in the other two." Such an integrated approach requires a considerable degree of emotional and intellectual maturity. Nevertheless, it does not mean that we should not give special focus to the concerns of the broad swathe of ordinary citizens. The average citizen wants, above all, prices to stop skyrocketing, more products at affordable prices, a higher income and more job opportunity. These are precisely the aspirations the government has sought to meet through a package of measures for reducing and restructuring customs tariffs and for restructuring income tax scales. As Nazif said last Friday, "we have started with the urgent needs of the Egyptian people in this phase of development. Our aim is to fulfil three fundamental demands: creating work opportunities for youth; guaranteeing the availability of the necessities of life, such as food and drink, which is connected to the question of subsidies; and improving the quality of life through services provided to the Egyptian family, such as education, health and transport." But if reform is to be cumulative and sustained, we must avert actions that might precipitate chaos. But, by no means has the government taken the need to balance reform with stability as an excuse for inaction in the political domain. Legislation and bureaucratic changes are in the works to ensure a broader scope of participatory democracy and guarantees for freedom of opinion and expression and respect for human rights. That these issues are being placed before the public for discussion and debate reflects the government's determination to ensure that no segment of society monopolises the reform process. All legitimate political parties and social forces have been invited to participate in this discussion with the aim of reaching a collective vision of a comprehensive national reform project. This, in turn, requires those with proposals to offer to present them coolly and coherently. The last thing we need at this delicate juncture is demagoguery, political posturing, misinformation and nihilistic scepticism. Unfortunately, however, it appears that many of the clamouring voices we hear at present have nothing constructive to offer. If they have, then why have they not stepped forward? The doors are so clearly open to their contributions as long as they promote the general welfare. My suspicion is that much of the persistent griping for the sake of griping stems from a desperate sense of impotency and that those so afflicted feel compelled to convey this to the public. After all, misery loves company. Another cause resides in that blinkered approach that refuses to see the progress made in the fields of social, economic and political reform, since those so blinkered have condensed the entire process into the question of constitutional reform. I do not deny that amending the constitution is an important issue. However, it is one that requires thorough preparation at the appropriate time, so as to ensure the preservation of social stability and to protect the many gains achieved by reform. It should be borne in mind that amending the constitution is not an aim in itself, but rather one means among many for promoting development and comprehensive reform. All Egyptians seek a reform process that will place our country firmly on the path to national resurgence. As has become clear over the past few months such a process is in motion. As a comprehensive vision, it cannot be reduced to a single issue and as an integrated vision it cannot be treated piecemeal. I believe that the greatest challenge before the opposition parties is to rise to the level of responsibility that this vision and process demands, and to participate actively and constructively in the dialogue needed to formulate a national consensus over the various issues involved. The opportunity is there for all patriotically minded citizens, regardless of their political affiliations, to contribute. The hope is that we all bear in mind the need to abide by a spirit of objectivity and to place the welfare of Egypt above all other considerations.
