|
With
the conflict between groups supporting and opposing deposed president Mohamed Mursi
worsening, Egypt is very close to becoming a bigger Syria. Egypt and the world
are in a dilemma; whether to support the democratically elected illiberal
government or stand behind the new military dictatorship. This dilemma has made
a solid solution unlikely anytime soon.
When the Arab Spring arrived in 2011, the world wondered about the fate of Hosni Mubarak’s regime, and has been paying intense attention to Egypt’s future under the Muslim Brotherhood administration. After disavowing violence in the 1970s, this group has strived politically against the military regime, favoring open-free elections and peaceful democratic transition.
However, after democratically winning the parliamentary and presidential elections and constitutional referendum, the group become illiberal. The administration provided less protection for religious minorities, limited women’s participation in presidential elections, banned members of the previous ruling political party from politics for a decade and above all president Mursi declared his decree immune from judicial scrutiny. This situation then led the opposition to push for another election.
When the Arab Spring arrived in 2011, the world wondered about the fate of Hosni Mubarak’s regime, and has been paying intense attention to Egypt’s future under the Muslim Brotherhood administration. After disavowing violence in the 1970s, this group has strived politically against the military regime, favoring open-free elections and peaceful democratic transition.
However, after democratically winning the parliamentary and presidential elections and constitutional referendum, the group become illiberal. The administration provided less protection for religious minorities, limited women’s participation in presidential elections, banned members of the previous ruling political party from politics for a decade and above all president Mursi declared his decree immune from judicial scrutiny. This situation then led the opposition to push for another election.
Before
it materialized, the military took over the government. It insisted that its
action did not constitute a coup, because it did not initiate or let civilians
form a new government. In spite of all this, it is the military that installed
new leaders and asked them for a mandate to crack down on potential terror
threats, including the Muslim Brotherhood. Should the tension escalate, it will
radicalize the Brotherhood and prime it to align with al-Qaeda affiliates or
any religious radical groups.
Against this backdrop, as a response, the government of Indonesia has issued a travel warning for its nationals and asked Indonesians living in Egypt to distance themselves from any potential clashes and take a neutral stance.
Furthermore, at the bilateral level, both President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa have asked both sides to stop the use of violence and called for compromise and reconciliation.
At the multilateral level, Jakarta is envisaging wider involvement of the UN and plans to push this agenda via multilateral venues, such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). These measures — protection of nationals and diplomatic channels optimization — are good but somewhat ordinary. The Indonesian government should brave itself to take bolder, more concrete and concise preventive and curative steps.
Indonesia can end this dilemma first of all by asking the Egyptian military to stop categorizing the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror threat and identify it as an illiberal democrat group; a conservative political group not fit to govern, but not a terrorist or a violent radical religious organization.
Second, Indonesia needs to formally acknowledge that the military action in Egypt was a coup; therefore any political, financial and military support for Egypt could be evaluated accordingly. Third, we should push for a shorter transition period. Fourth, Indonesia should ask both sides to respect the revised state constitution, which has the space for gradual and peaceful amendments.
Why should Indonesia do this? From a realist perspective, our proactive stance toward Egypt could send a clear pragmatic message both to Indonesia and the world at large, that peaceful political Islam — however conservative — is a better temporary choice than violent radical Islam.
We have elements of global political Islam thriving formally in our political institution, and concurrently are experiencing the re-radicalization of minor religious groups. In this respect, we have been somewhat successful in addressing both, and we need to remain so.
From a constructivist perspective, Indonesia has experienced a military coup and dictatorship, and regionally has the capacity to engage military rule and assist peaceful transition in Myanmar. Indonesia also knows how to gradually and peacefully amend its Constitution by achieving a balanced approach in dealing with nationalist and religious demands. Finally, Indonesia cares about the Palestinian-Israel peace process, and efforts in Egypt could instill Indonesia deeper in its success.
Therefore, without further delay, Indonesia should send a task force to Egypt. It’s time to invite bright minds from both national Islamic and non-Islamic political parties and religious organizations, legal scholars who specialize in constitutional matters, civil-military relations experts and strategic think tanks to join this diplomatic effort to create a faster and peaceful transition there.
With this realist constructivist approach, we could end the violence by changing global understanding and lead through example. ●
Against this backdrop, as a response, the government of Indonesia has issued a travel warning for its nationals and asked Indonesians living in Egypt to distance themselves from any potential clashes and take a neutral stance.
Furthermore, at the bilateral level, both President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa have asked both sides to stop the use of violence and called for compromise and reconciliation.
At the multilateral level, Jakarta is envisaging wider involvement of the UN and plans to push this agenda via multilateral venues, such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). These measures — protection of nationals and diplomatic channels optimization — are good but somewhat ordinary. The Indonesian government should brave itself to take bolder, more concrete and concise preventive and curative steps.
Indonesia can end this dilemma first of all by asking the Egyptian military to stop categorizing the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror threat and identify it as an illiberal democrat group; a conservative political group not fit to govern, but not a terrorist or a violent radical religious organization.
Second, Indonesia needs to formally acknowledge that the military action in Egypt was a coup; therefore any political, financial and military support for Egypt could be evaluated accordingly. Third, we should push for a shorter transition period. Fourth, Indonesia should ask both sides to respect the revised state constitution, which has the space for gradual and peaceful amendments.
Why should Indonesia do this? From a realist perspective, our proactive stance toward Egypt could send a clear pragmatic message both to Indonesia and the world at large, that peaceful political Islam — however conservative — is a better temporary choice than violent radical Islam.
We have elements of global political Islam thriving formally in our political institution, and concurrently are experiencing the re-radicalization of minor religious groups. In this respect, we have been somewhat successful in addressing both, and we need to remain so.
From a constructivist perspective, Indonesia has experienced a military coup and dictatorship, and regionally has the capacity to engage military rule and assist peaceful transition in Myanmar. Indonesia also knows how to gradually and peacefully amend its Constitution by achieving a balanced approach in dealing with nationalist and religious demands. Finally, Indonesia cares about the Palestinian-Israel peace process, and efforts in Egypt could instill Indonesia deeper in its success.
Therefore, without further delay, Indonesia should send a task force to Egypt. It’s time to invite bright minds from both national Islamic and non-Islamic political parties and religious organizations, legal scholars who specialize in constitutional matters, civil-military relations experts and strategic think tanks to join this diplomatic effort to create a faster and peaceful transition there.
With this realist constructivist approach, we could end the violence by changing global understanding and lead through example. ●
