The popular impeachment thesis

Turmoil in Egypt continues to engage analysts and policymakers. Last week, Dr. Mona Makram-Ebeid, an Egyptian academic and former member of the Shura Council, spoke about the current situation in Egypt at her “favorite think tank” in Washington D.C., the Middle East Institute. Ambassador Wendy Chamberlin, the president of the Middle East Institute, introduced the speaker and moderated the discussion.

For Makram-Ebeid, being in Egypt during the second revolution constituted “the most exciting but terribly dangerous days” of her political career. While she was skeptical that the Tamarod movement would in fact be able to gather 15 million signatures, she signed its petition.  Resigning from the Shura Council, Makram-Ebeid joined the millions of Egyptians in Tahrir Square calling for Morsi to step down.

On June 30, Makram-Ebeid was summoned for a meeting at (former) Minister Kafrawi’s house. General Fouad Allam, former deputy chief of Egypt’s internal security, as well as journalists and representative of various movements, were present. Minister Kafrawi mentioned that they have been in touch with the army, the Coptic Pope, Sheikh al-Azhar, and General Sisi. He added that the army had requested a “written popular demand” to intervene and prevent a bloodbath. The group present then wrote a request saying: “You gave everyone one week to resolve the problems and to come to a compromise, otherwise you would step in to prevent a bloodbath. So we are asking you to fulfill your pledges, because we are on the brink of a civil war and a real bloodbath.” The army intervened.

Asking whether Morsi’s downfall was inevitable, Makram-Ebeid replied that Egyptians view their country as Um al-Dunya: the mother of the world. It is possible that no government could have solved Egypt’s economic problems in a year. Nevertheless, any wise government would have instilled a sense of karamah, or dignity, among Egyptians. This is where Morsi failed. Not only did he not deal with the problems of poverty and unemployment, he also “was whatever the opposite of charisma is.” Egyptians felt humiliated at seeing him. This sense was compounded when Morsi installed his “cronies” in government offices, instead of forming a national government. Thus, while the Muslim Brotherhood’s downfall was not inevitable from the beginning, they intervened in the military’s budget, instigated sectarian violence, and marginalized the judiciary, intellectuals, artists, women, Copts, and other groups. This resulted in their downfall.

Many wonder whether the revolution constitutes a coup. Makram-Ebeid responded by asking: “How important is this?… whether this is a coup or not a coup, it’s over.” It is not intervention, but rather inaction by the army that would have been criminal, she added. The army responded to the popular demands of Egyptians, as evidenced by the 30 million Egyptians who took to the streets and prevented a bloodbath, which would have jeopardized Morsi’s own life. Thus, Makram-Ebeid prefers to describe the event as a “popular impeachment.”

As to the US role in Egypt, Makram-Ebeid recommended that it should not support Egypt only to maintain peace with Israel. Rather, the US needs to push for a democratic and inclusive government.  It should also encourage the private sector and businessmen, and should even ask them to contribute more financial assistance and help reduce youth unemployment. What made America great, Makram-Ebeid asserted, is philanthropy. Moreover, the US needs to further engage different parties in Egypt and condemn the marginalization of groups such as women and Christians. Makram-Ebeid added that perception is stronger than reality. The prevalent perception in Egypt is America’s undeniable support for the Muslim Brotherhood. The US needs to change that.

Makram-Ebeid then added three things Egyptians need to do. First, they need to stop to the incitement and demonization of the Brotherhood. Egyptians should strive for reconciliation, not further divisions. After all, they worked together to bring the Mubarak regime down. Second, while General Sisi has several advantages over former General Tantawi, as he is younger, savvy, and trained in the U.S. (rather than the USSR), the military continues to have no real interest in democracy. It thus falls upon the seculars and liberals to unify under a common leadership and program and to implement the road map to democratization. And finally, the opposition needs to ensure that the transition period, run under military control, is as short as possible.

Ambassador Chamberlin then mentioned that democracy is a ground game. The youths of Tamarod have mobilized on their computers, but a lot of democracy requires getting into the streets, knocking on doors and building a party from the ground up. Should we expect to see that as a very important election approaches? Makram-Ebeid responded by saying this is an important challenge for Egyptians. After the 2011 revolution, everyone in Tahrir became an expert on the top TV shows, and no one was left to run for elections. Makram-Ebeid hopes this does not happen again. She wants the recent protesters to grow a grassroots organization of their own, rather than join an existing one. While she has nothing against elderly people, she wants to see some “fresh blood” in politics.

Asked if recent events could set a bad precedent by deposing an elected president who had lost popularity, Makram-Ebeid responded by saying this is unlikely. “This is not the Tea Party,” she added. Most Egyptians took lessons from the past 30 months, so such a move is unlikely to occur again. Egyptians would refuse any dictatorship. “Today, we have a past president, an ousted president, and no president.” This is in a country where presidents stay until their death or assassination, so everything is new for Egyptians, she concluded.