Today, a special year ends. 2011 will write history as a never-known period of worldwide uprise. From the Arab world in spring to Europe in summer, to Wall Street in fall and to Russia in winter. Everything is connected now. Optimism for change, long presumed dead, is back on the rise.
However in Egypt – a major country of the uprisings and role model for further protests – optimism is not shared by everyone. “Protests make us weak and poor,” is what an Egyptian friend of mine told me recently, when asked about the Tahrir Square demonstrations. And showing my family around in Egypt this week, I saw what he meant: We found the famous Giza Pyramids to be almost empty, with more merchants than tourists around. It is high season and Egypt’s tourism is dead. And this just one sector of Egypt’s economy that experiences a historic low.
So critics like my Egyptian friend say: Protests won’t solve our problems – they will make them worse. Protests, they say, threaten our security and hit the economy in particular. After revolution, we will be broke. We end up worse than before. Egypt, they say, can’t afford Revolution.
Protest is Risky
There is something convincing about this critics, I confess. Obviously, economies get vulnerable when systems are overthrown or hit. The rise of the Nazi Regime was in big parts a result of Germany’s recession in the early 1930’s. A 1:1 analogy would be exaggerated, but there are similarities: People are unemployed, and many of them poor. Political parties do not have convincing answers but extremist movements claim to have. This could go wrong without a stable, constitution-defending institution – that is what Egypt’s Military Council (SCAF) claims to be.
So will further protests, that may eventually overthrow the SCAF, cause recession and chaos in Egypt? And then another evil, even worse dictatorship than in Mubarak times? Iranian conditions? Counter-revolution? No one knows, since nothing is for sure these days. However, one thing is sure to me: Protest against the current “transitional” system is the only measure to prevent such a threat. Here is why:
No Protest: Another Dictatorship
First, consider the alternative to protesting, which would be: No protest. Ending protest also means the start of another quasi-dictatorship – we could see that in the last months. Parliament and government do not have a say, and the SCAF tries to keep them weak in the future. They defend their privileges in the constitution. So even if the military may steps down after Egypt’s presidential elections, they will still pull the strips.
And the military rule does not just oppress people, it also is an economic risk. Countries led by SCAF-like elites suffer from corruption and the arbitrariness of their decisions. Even if the economy would go well, most people would not have their share of the wealth. If the “trickle-down-effect” ever worked, than certainly the least in autocratic elite systems like Egypt, where the ruling military is a state within the state. Dictatorships may pay out for the country’s one-percenters, or for (foreign) companies investing in low wages. But certainly not for the overall economy.
Democracy Pays Out
So what pays out then? Democracy does, I believe. What could be better for an economy than a legitimate government that encourages every citizen (if minority or not) to use his/her potential not just as a member of society, but also in terms of business? What is healthier for a system than elections that push failing governments out of power? Democracy is neither easy nor fun, but it pays out.
However, since the military will not give up its oppressing privileges, pressure for democracy has to come from the people. Trickle-up. Democracy, in Egypt’s case, can only be established by protest. Revolution may screws the balance sheets of banks, companies or tourist guides for a while. But resistance is the least cost compared to economic and social oppression that Egyptians would face otherwise.
Revolution is Tough, But the Only Way
So yes: Revolution is dangerous, threatening and economy-weakening for now. The Giza Pyramids may stay empty for another while. Not good for the Pyramid merchants, not good for many Egyptians. But for now, it is the only way for sustainable stability in the country. Critics using the economic downfall as a killer phrase are dead wrong. Their shortsightedness is even dangerous: They promote an oppressing system for the sake of a seemingly well-running economy.
The fall of the Berlin Wall was not cheap for Germany. Even worst estimates at the time had to be doubled and tripled in the end. If Germans would have known the real costs in 1989, some would have probably opposed an immediate reunification. But looking back now, Germany did not regret the step at all – not even economically, in the end.
So can Egypt afford revolution? It must afford revolution, I believe – anything else is not an option. Let Egypt shake, for the better. Happy New Year.
Liked or hated the article? I would love to hear some thoughts. I could not manage to put a comment section in here, but you can comment the article on my facebook page. And you can email me. Please note however that I am not writing as an expert on Middle East affairs or Egyptian politics whatsoever. The comment is result of my thoughts on Egypt as a German student of politics, staying in Cairo since early October.
