If chaos is to be avoided in Egypt, the Higher Council of the Armed Forces should take firm measures to rule the country instead of merely managing it, says Galal Nassar Where is Egypt heading? The question comes to mind as one contemplates the country's deteriorating security, slowing economy, dwindling currency reserves and drop in tourism. You know that things are bad when the country's top satirical writer, Ahmed Ragab, also says he's too depressed to write anymore. What's going on in Egypt is a kind of chess game. Imagine a chessboard with two players sitting across from each other. One of them can be seen and the other not. The player that cannot be seen has some knowledge of the flashpoints in the country. He knows about the sectarian problem, one of the weakest links in society, and he understands the sympathy with the Palestinians, born out of the siege on Gaza. This invisible chess player also knows how people might react were there to be calls for a march on the borders and the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador. He knows about the corruption related to the sales of Egyptian natural gas to Israel. He knows about the shortages of foodstuffs and fuel. He knows about the tensions between Sufis and Salafis over the question of tombs. He knows about the thugs and the loss of morale in the police. He also knows about the trials of corrupt former officials and how these started even before there was any clear vision of the future. He wants to stir up trouble between the Armed Forces and the people, since he knows that the Armed Forces are the country's last bulwark, and he will do anything to undermine them, with or without foreign help. Sitting on the other side of the chessboard is the player we can see, which is the Higher Council of the Armed Forces (HCAF). This says that it is merely running the country and not ruling it. Its leaders are making sure that things don't get out of hand, and they don't want to be part of any major confrontation. As a result, they are overly cautious when it comes to suppressing chaos, rounding up thugs and keeping the Salafis at bay. In short, the HCAF is sitting across the table from a player, or perhaps several players, who are determined to bring Egypt to its knees. This is a player that has every intention of stirring up trouble in the hope of triggering a clash between the nation and the army. The player sitting across the table from the HCAF obviously thinks a lot of himself, believing that he is the only force organised and worthy enough to run the country. This player believes that the HCAF should allow him to have everything his way. Much debate is taking place in Egypt these days, but none of it lives up to the promises that the protesters raised in Tahrir Square in Cairo, in front of the Qaed Ibrahim Mosque in Alexandria or in Arbiyin Square in Suez. Instead, the debate is going round in circles, not attempting to draw up a roadmap for the future or finding a way to restore normality to the country. Moreover, those in charge are blaming "remnants of the old regime" for everything that goes wrong. The player facing the HCAF at the chessboard knows that the protesters who went out into the streets on 25 January had no intention of destroying the Egyptian state and its institutions. Instead, he knows that it was his followers who torched police stations, attacked State Security offices and broke into prisons. This is a player who knows how to pick fights, knowing when to appear and when to disappear. The young people who led the January Revolution struggled well, bringing down the decaying Mubarak regime and paying for their actions with their blood. They had the support of the nation, for the demands they were making were ones that many had embraced for years. Yet, these young people's lofty goals and their romantic beliefs are not enough to suspend history's rules, which say that while revolutions depend on noble and romantic ideals, they can often end up benefiting opportunists and cowards. The revolutionaries have isolated themselves from the streets by forming unions, starting coalitions and engaging in disputes, while leaving the streets to the Salafis, the reactionaries and anyone keen on exploiting the poor and ignorant. In a country in which half the population is illiterate, it is not hard to convince people that this life can be sacrificed for a better afterlife, making it easy to convince those who do not know any better that they should carry out attacks on Copts, Sufis or secularists. It is also easy to play the game of parties and elections for invidious ends, wanting 50 per cent of parliamentary seats or more. It is easy to think of elections as "conquests" of the ballot box, as someone said recently, someone else demanding a "United States of Islam". Regarding the remnants of the former ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), it should be clear that their role has been blown up out of all proportion. While it is predictable for the remnants of the old regime to defend their interests and attempt to dodge justice, these remnants are limited in number and they are not half as powerful as the invisible player sitting across the chessboard from the HCAF and wreaking havoc on the country. The remnants of the old regime are not armed, and they have no popular support or trained militia. They are also not popular among the Salafi elements. In short, it is time for the HCAF to step up its game, stopping managing the country and instead trying to rule it, as veteran journalist Mohamed Hassanein Heikal has suggested. Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi could serve as interim president in this regard, for the HCAF has the confidence of the country's silent majority, and it could prove itself a capable player in the game that is already underway. The HCAF should lay down the ground rules for a civil state, one that is ruled by law and seeks justice for all. If needed, the HCAF should also take extraordinary measures to stamp out the chaos that we are all now facing. The government led by Prime Minister Essam Sharaf has proved itself to be sympathetic to protests, but it has no mechanism for resolving problems or a vision for the future. Its habit of blaming everything that goes wrong on "remnants of the former regime" is also far from reassuring. The former regime deprived people of their hopes for a better life, but now chaos is taking its toll on the country. Unless we stop this chaos, another revolution may follow, and this time it will be the revolution that sociologists warned us of before 25 January: the revolution of the hungry . (see Editorial: 'We need a civic state now' p.16)
