February 18th, 2011 by Kyle

On Wednesday, the Middle East Institute hosted an event focused on the public opinions of Egyptians in the wake of Mubarak’s fall from power, entitled, “After Mubarak: What do the Egyptian People Really Want?” The Middle East Institute hosted two speakers; Steven Kull, Middle East public opinion expert and director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, along with, Shibley Telhami, the Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland and Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Saban Center of the Brookings Institution.

For full notes, click here for pdf. or continue below.

Steven Kull began the discussion by addressing public opinion poll data from Egypt that addressed a wide range of issues including governance, religion and rights. What Kull found striking was the widespread support for liberal values sighting a poll his office worked on which found that 83% of Egyptians say that democracy is a good way to govern Egypt, and that 98% of Egyptians believe that the will of the people should be the basis of government. Kull sighted a World Value Survey which found that Egyptians overwhelmingly support (91%) the notion that democracy is better than another other form of government. He also stated that Egypt is amongst the highest values in the world in terms of dissatisfaction with their government, thus he believes that it is not just the Egyptian youth who are dissatisfied with their government, but all facets of Egyptian society.

Kull sighted evidence from numerous other polls which supported his claims that there is majority support in Egyptian society for freedom of speech, freedom of press, internet rights, women’s rights (9 out of 10 supported equal rights) and religious freedom (88% agree). To counter these polls Kull sighted numerous other polls which showed strong support for Islamist values; 92% support strong Islamic values in Egypt’s government, 67% believe Shari’a should be the only source of law and 57% believe that Shari’a law should play a larger role in Egypt’s government. With results in support of both Islamist and liberal values, Kull noted that there also remains a strong distrust for Islamist political parties in Egypt amongst individuals polled, and also that 91% of people believe that democracy is compatible with Islam.

Kull believes that it would be a real problem if the US did, or was perceived to, only support secular parties in upcoming elections because it would potentially add strength to the perception that the US is domineering internal politics across the region.  He stated that the US should not make creating political parties a top priority in Egypt. He added if there is a purely secular-Islamist competition that, “I think the Islamists are more likely to gain the upper hand.” Kull argues that the US should pay greater attention to “the development of a public voice” which he believes is key to creating democracy in Egypt. If this can be achieved Kull asserts that Egyptians can find a way to coalesce both their liberal and Islamic ideas into one society.

Shibley Telhami sighted the Iranian Revolution of 1979 as the only revolution that has taken place in the Middle East in modern history. Given this reality he argued that those who would have tried to predict these events in Tunisia and Egypt would have been wrong, because these events are a true anomaly. Nonetheless Telhami asserts: “The gap is growing and it is becoming unsustainable” between the people of the Middle East and their governments. He believes that this gap, “has to change, it cannot be sustained.”

Telhami specified that the revolutions across the Middle East are not food riots, but instead this is a “dignity revolution” taking place. He asserted that the people who have worked to foment this revolution are not the uneducated and poor, but instead are of the middle and upper classes such as, Wael Ghonim, the Google executive who used the internet to help spur the revolution. Telhami argued that this was clear because “what the government stood for was not what they (Egyptian citizens) stood for.”

In his discussion of the role of the United States in regards to the uprising in Egypt, Telhami went to great lengths to argue that the US should not be involved. Telhami believes this must be the policy because from research he and others have conducted he asserts that Arabs believe that the US’ foremost foreign policy goals in the region are oil and the protection of Israel. This perception of US policy coupled with his belief that US strategic priorities inherently extend authoritarianism in the region serve as reason for the US to not be involved in Egypt.

Telhami believes that all the hype surrounding the “Information Revolution” in the Middle East deserves credit, but that the underlying grievances perpetuated the revolution and internet networking sites helped connect activists and protesters. He believes that the internet coupled with a renewed spirit of assertiveness amongst Arab populations could have ramifications that could be “much bigger than imagined.”

When asked about some of the discrepancies between the Islam and democracy findings, from polls and whether the speakers felt there could be a synthesis Kull responded that he predicted an Iraqi style democracy in Egypt. This he believes will include a distinctly Islamic character to the state. Telhami disagreed with the Iraq connection because Egypt is much more homogenous being almost entirely Sunni Muslim and he believes that it is too soon to speculate about the outcome of the state in terms of religious make up. Telhami believes that it will be up to the international community including the US to allow things in Egypt to play out and then adjust policy in the face of whatever type of government comes to power through a democratic process.

Posted in Diplomacy, Egypt, Human Rights, Islam and Democracy, Islamist movements, Mideast Peace Plan, Military, Muslim Brotherhood, Protests, Public Opinion, Reform, Sectarianism, US foreign policy |