Aisopos blog

Egypt has long been one of America's strongest allies in the Middle East, but with popular protests on the verge of driving President Hosni Mubarak from office, Egypt's future relationship with the United States is in doubt. What is the current state of affairs in Egypt politically and who are the key players?

David Patel, a Cornell University professor of government who specializes in Middle East politics, Islamic institutions and political culture, talked about Egypt in a Q&A interview this week:

Q: A few days ago, you released a statement that the current regime was trying to foment chaos as an attempt to retain power. Can you talk about the seeming change in policy in light of Vice President Suleiman's more recent efforts to suppress the rioting through peaceful negotiation?

Patel: What we're seeing is a lot of movement within the party, pushing some people out. I think it's pretty clear that one faction within the [the ruling National Democratic Party] (NDP) is willing to sacrifice another faction within the NDP. A lot of the people associated with Gamal Mubarak [President Hosni Mubarak's son] have seen their assets frozen and their passports taken if they are not already out of the country. My sense is that a lot of the violence we saw a couple of day ago was orchestrated not from the cabinet, not from Omar Suleiman, the vice-president, or Mubarak, it was probably from mid-level NDP officials, other NDP officials, and people in the intelligence agencies.

There's a lot of competition within the party and they're pretty good at using thugs like this. There are networks of thugs that are used in elections and used to intimidate opponents. My sense isn't that the violence we saw a few days ago was from the top down, but from somebody else within the ruling party.

And you're right; the prime minister even apologized for it and said it was unacceptable. The military seems to be intervening more than they were before and that's why it stopped. The atmosphere in Tahrir is changed, it was a group of demonstrators under siege and now an almost festival-like atmosphere seems to be back with families and women in large numbers.

Q: Given the protesters' call for the immediate resignation of Mubarak and the current regime, who do you see as well-placed organizationally to take advantage of that and assume power in the short term?

Patel: The protesters are calling for a lot of things. Mubarak stepping down is the one that's easiest to chant. The real issue is: how is the transition going to be handled, and there are a couple different options. In Egypt the vice president is really the president-in-waiting. So picking Omar Suleiman is clearly designating him as the successor, and he is also someone who makes the Americans and the Israelis very comfortable. They know him very well from his time running the Egyptian Mukhabarat.

When you talk about a transition, what matters is really what's going to happen between now and September. Are they actually going to go ahead with presidential election in September? If so, how free will those elections be? Other people are talking about having parliamentary elections first, which could change things. Other people are talking about having some sort of triumvirate of one or two or three people leading some sort of transitional period which could be longer than September, delaying presidential elections and having some sort of constitutional review process first. Omar Suleiman would clearly play a prominent role, maybe even as a first among equals if that occurs.

Q: The constitution of Egypt clearly spells out the rules for succession, which would leave the NDP firmly in power if they were to follow those rules and Mubarak resigned. So it doesn't seem as though that's going to be an acceptable solution for most of the parties involved (other than the NDP).

Patel: It goes to the speaker of parliament. It also would limit the ability of a new president to call for new parliamentary elections. My understanding is that only an "elected president" can dissolve parliament and call for new elections. So, these are debates about the role of the constitution and how important that constitution and the words of that constitution should be for guiding this process.

It's pretty clear Mubarak isn't calling the shots anymore, right? Authority has moved away from him. Omar Suleiman is calling the shots. The people who were around and relied on access to Mubarak for their influence have found new patrons within the military and the party or are scrambling to find them. Mubarak is president in name only at this point.

He is hugely symbolically important, especially for the protesters, but even if he doesn't step down, his influence right now is minimal. He's not the one making statements anymore. It's Omar Suleiman who went on television the other day. It's Ahmed Shafik who's making statements. It's Tantawi, the defense minister, who's going down to Tahrir. So Mubarak's no longer the acting president. Even within the party, I don't think he's that important anymore.

Q: Of the other factions, there's the Muslim Brothers with whom the U.S. seems quite preoccupied. What is their actual influence in Egypt?

Patel: The Muslim Brothers are the largest and best organized of those opposition groups. We don't know how much support they have for several reasons. A lot of people supported the Muslim Brothers because they were seen as the only viable alternative to Mubarak. We know that a lot of the support for the Muslim Brothers comes from their ability to provide services that the Egyptian people need through clinics, schools and training centers. Well, if a new Egyptian government provides better for the Egyptian people and provides those services for the Egyptian people, maybe the influence of the Muslim Brothers in that avenue will decline.

There are a lot of people who like to say that they Egyptian Brothers have 15-20 percent of the Egyptian population behind them now. That's based not on how they did in the last election, but the previous election. There wasn't a free and fair election. There clearly wasn't a good expression of people's ultimate preferences, so you really can't estimate the support for the Muslim Brothers that way.

The Brothers have come out and said that they are not going to rule. They're not going to run somebody for president, and in fact, it looks like they are going to back a secular candidate for president. It seems like they've done everything they could to say that they will support a democratic process in terms of elections. They're working with secularists, and they'll be a part of the new order. They're not going to dominate it though. There's good reason, both empirically and theoretically, to think that they're not going to dominate Egypt in the short, medium, or long run.

The military is very well trained, it's very large, it's very well equipped. Order is not going to break down in Egypt. It's not like the Muslim Brothers are going to send their people out in the streets and seize power. The military isn't going to let that happen.

Q: One of the other groups that has become prominent is that of ElBaradei. Do you see him and his group, which, one might argue, has less in-country organization at this point, as playing a strong role?

Patel: He's been very prominent in the western media because he's a name and a face people recognize. He tried to position himself at the head of the protesters. You saw that there was a very dramatic scene of him going to Tahrir Square and giving a speech. My sense is that he doesn't have much of an organization in Egypt. Which could be both an advantage and a disadvantage, right?

He might be less threatening to various opposition groups as a figurehead, but he hasn't been able to consolidate all the opposition groups and voices behind him. There are a number of other groups that are negotiating not through him, but directly with the Egyptian government. The Muslim Brothers have said they would support him as a potential candidate for president. He's somebody who probably will emerge as one of the top two or three opposition leaders at least in the interim period. How much staying power he has in the long run, whether or not he can develop a political party and organization of his own is another matter entirely.

Q: Minister of Defense Tantawi is seen by many to be someone separate from Mubarak and Suleiman. While he may be following orders, the west is reporting that the military is taking more of a stand-offish role in support of the government. Do you see that as entirely false and only a western perspective?

Patel: You're trying to ask me if there's going to be a coup? The military is massive, at least 350,000 to 400,000. The Egyptian military currently runs between 15 and 24 factories around the country. They have massive economic and business interests throughout the country. Military officers and businesses and people connected to them are incredibly influential in the Egyptian economy. There's a lot of people in the Egyptian military interested in preserving their access to things, making sure that military contractors are involved in building all those new roads around Cairo, making sure that the military is the dominant player, especially in food industries.

They've gotten very good at dividing the kitty. They have become very good at balancing factions within the military. They've been a pretty stable military regime. You don't hear about coup attempts within the military in Egypt very often. I'd say the likelihood of a coup is very low. A lot of people have incentive to make sure the military comes out, as a whole, in a strong position, economically, perhaps even more importantly than politically.

Q: What do you see, in the near term, as a catalyst for ending the protests and getting back to ordinary life in Egypt?

Patel: Cairo and the surrounding areas are 18 million people, and the protests are concentrated in one area, Tahrir Square. Most of Cairo is, if not business as usual, seeing people going to work. People are going out and selling things, even in the middle of Tahrir.

The government is hoping that the protesters will get tired, that they'll, through attrition, go home. That doesn't seem to be happening. Those protesters there seem to be extremely resilient. If anything, the numbers have grown over time and they have tremendous staying power.

So the regime's strategy now seems to be to try to buy off some of the opposition. They've made what they see as some concessions to the protesters. They're hoping that the opposition groups will make some concessions. The Muslim Brothers sitting down to talk to Omar Suleiman the other day was a concession. They didn't agree to anything, as I understand it, but they did sit down with him.

A lot of different people try to represent the protesters and try to negotiate with the government, various groups of wisemen, ElBaradei, various political parties. The government's hoping that some of the opposition groups will pull their support away. They're hoping that some of the Egyptians who aren't involved in any way will say, "This has gone on too long. You've achieved enough; we can achieve more without being there in Tahrir." So they're hoping that public opinion in Egypt will turn against public protests. The protesters have said that they'll stay there indefinitely. It's been going on for two weeks now. The military has said they're not going to crack down so the protesters have a sense of safety now that they didn't have a couple days ago. I think you could see this continuing to go on for several more weeks, if you don't see some sort of agreement between various opposition groups and the government as to how a transition would occur... and for Mubarak to step down.

Q: The one thing that almost all the parties agree upon, is that they don't want outsiders to determine their future. They don't want people outside Egypt either corrupting the situation or exerting undue influence. That could be the United States, Iran, or whomever. What countries are well-poised, other than the United States, to continue or to begin to have a strong influence in Egypt?

Patel: In the short run, nobody. This is going to be resolved by Egypt one way or another. I don't think the United States can force Mubarak out of office. I don't think any other actors can put the pressure that will be decisive one way or another. Egyptians are determining the future of Egypt and that's a good thing. The Egyptian government continuously repeats the line that these are foreign agitators. Sometimes they blame Iranians. Sometimes they blame Israelis. Sometimes they blame Americans. They're all sorts of rumors flying around about outside agitation to weaken the homeland, to weaken the stability of Egypt. I haven't seen any evidence of foreign influence in the protests whatsoever. This is clearly an Egyptian, and a very diverse Egyptian, protest.