The Road to Revolution is Paved with Bread Not Tech.

Bread is always the key

And it always has been.

Napoleon’s famous adage that an Army marches on its stomach applies to something else he knew a little something about – popular revolt. Indeed, a brief scan of the French Revolution might be more than a little prescient as Egypt settles in for calamitous disappointment.

Simply put, the story goes like this.

While it was the gifted thinkers of the bourgeoisie in France that framed and drove the conflict with the monarchy, aristocracy, and clergy, it was the energizing of the mob that turned the slow and enlightened march to reform into an irresistible and uncontrollable surge, starting from the Siege of the Bastille in 1789.  And what triggered the rage of the urban poor? Astronomical bread prices brought on by disastrous harvests and cynical price controls. For the Sans-Culottes on the streets of Paris spending 80% or more of one’s meager day wages on bread meant slow starvation. So a sheet of musket fire was hardly something to be feared.

The power of the mob to drive class revenge reached its bloody zenith during the Reign of Terror. Gone was the great oratory of Marat, and the brave populism of Danton, the latter silenced by the dictatorial insanity of Robespierre, himself a victim of the guillotine. And from 1789 to the rise of Napoleon, the Sans-Culottes equated revolutionary glory with one thing above all. Cheap and plentiful bread.

In Egypt, bourgeois reformers with their new social networking toys were able to lay low a dictator (if not the edifice of the state) with the support of an urban poor traumatized by high food prices. Throughout the Arab world, governments are busily meddling with price controls to appease their own masses, and prevent them becoming the street armies of existing middle class democracy advocates. In China, skyrocketing food inflation could bind an unsettled Internet-obsessed middle class with the wider peasantry and put serious pressure on the Communist Party.

Technology is a religion with its own self-serving vanity.  But revolutions happen not so much because of the smart phone, but far more because of the simple baguette.

Egypt: The Army’s In Control. What Next?

Just Fired Hos. Anyone Want To Be Prez?

In hindsight, Mubarak was done the moment the police lost control. Mubarak could only truly count on the police, and when his attempt to use them to retake the square fell flat a couple of weeks ago, it was only a matter of time before he looked to the Army for protection.

Suleiman wasn’t going to allow Mubarak to take the whole shooting party down, but Hosni begged for time, and Suleiman agreed to try and wait out the demonstrators. The demonstrators responded by realizing they were being penned in the square, regrouped, reinforced and threatened to break out.

After rumors (sourced perhaps from the US but also maybe internally) started to swell that Mubarak was on his way built on the streets, Suleiman told Mubarak to obfuscate and confuse in one last vain attempt to keep him in power, but the demonstrators were having none of it. As the mood turned ugly, there were only two ways to return the country to stablility, fire on the crowd or sacrifice Mubarak.

And so he went.  It all happened, very, very fast.

The Army has bought some time. The protesters have their scalp and the hope is that they’ll go home. The Army’s plan is probably to stack the cards so the transition to democracy is as much in their favor as possible. They also know that now Mubarak has gone, and discussions about the future shape of Egypt are about to begin, the protests, stunning so far in their leaderlessness, are going to need some, but quick.

The Army no doubt relishes the idea of dealing with some US-educated Google executive who lived in the UAE, weeps in public and is married to an American, now being the voice of the Democratic movement. He’d last five minutes, and he’s wisely reluctant to take the reins. They’re even keener on El-Baradei, long time secular resident of Geneva, who’s failed to get the crowd behind him to any meaningful degree and totally lacks a power base. He’s probably the puppet of choice, but it’s unlikely he’s got the chops. So who else is there that’s not the Brotherhood? The answer has to be a fat capitalist member of the business elite. Again, the Army is probably licking its collective camouflaged lips at that one. A technocratic dose of neo-liberalism is probably not quite what the Egyptian street has in mind when they showed up in Tahrir Square.

A full on military takeover is not viable or seen as legitimate (except in an out and out emergency ) so ultimately the Army is going to have to choose a ‘leader’ that is not Suleiman – who has already announced he’s stepping down in favor of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces deal (a name that’s right out of the Military Coup Hall of Fame).

Clearly, Army control is short term, and that’s the way they want it. The last thing the military needs is to actually be responsible for running a poverty-stricken country that survives on tourism, baksheesh and government largesse. Fixing the monumental social and economic problems the nation faces is not in the Army’s manual and never has been. No, they’d rather have some other sucker on the hook for that. And what better way to give that poor schmo legitimacy than to have him, you know, elected by the people.

So what does the Army actually want? Simply put, it wants what it has now. It wants nothing to change. It enjoys tremendous wealth, privilege and power, gets to play with brand new toys like F-16s and M-1 tanks, which, incidentally, don’t actually have to be risked on the field of war. It’s loved by the people and because of the peace with Israel, it can get on with the edifying and decidedly less lethal business of making gobs of money for its officer class through massive involvement in every level of Egyptian economic society. What’s not to like?

And what about the Protesters? What do they want? Well, we’re about to find out that beyond the sacrifice of Mubarak, the various groups in Tahrir Square have precious little in common. But one thing they all want is for stuff to change (in their own very special ways). Of course any change of any kind is exactly what the Army doesn’t want.  Beyond that, there are probably as many visions or Egypt’s future as there are mobile cellphone charging stations in Tahrir Square. And each of the ideas is as charged and potentially dangerous too.

Does the bourgeois elite want Sharia? No way. Does the urban poor want the elite’s economic control and privileges to be maintained? No. Do and old and young see eye to eye? Nope. And guess who knows all that better than anyone? Suleiman and the “Supreme Council”. He’ll exploit those new divisions for all their worth so that the democracy that emerges is weak and fragmented, like the one in Pakistan.

The reason is simple. An ongoing plurality is a disaster for Army power. Divisions are far better, and in a place like Egypt, likely to stifle serious attempts at the very change that Army doesn’t want. I mean, if a plurality called for the peace with Israel to be rescinded, they’d have to go back on a war footing. That would be bad, and what would be even worse is the idea that the military budget could be sacrificed to say, make people’s lives better.

The elephant in the room is Islam. The Muslim Brotherhood knows that economic disaster is its number one ally. The more a national infrastructure breaks down, the more Islam can fill the void. The MB’s offshoot in Gaza, Hamas, plays that card to perfection, as does the Hizbollah in Lebanon, providing its very own “socio-religious contract.”  Egypt isn’t much better off than Gaza, if at all.  That’s good news for the MB but only as long as it doesn’t actually ‘run’ anything with a government seal over its door.

So the MB doesn’t really want power, for the same reason that the Army doesn’t want it. They don’t want to be on the hook, simply because if they were, they’d have to do something. And that’s not easy in a nation like Egypt which is an economic basket case waiting to happen. The last thing the Islamists want is responsibility for that, because it might put a crimp in their popularity. They’d rather pick up the pieces with their Islamic social services after the secular leaders have messed things up. Then they can blame the elite, Israel, as well as the West, and invoke Allah in one fell swoop.

Indeed, staying out of power is probably the only way to keep the MB together. If they won democratic power, they’d have to appease the Egyptian elite and Army which decidedly don’t want Sharia, which would put an end to any upbeat economic prospects in Egypt with all the attendant problems that would cause.  There would also be one other minor problem. If the Brotherhood led a government, their own radical elements would most probably splinter because the beloved Islamic caliphate was taking too long to be forged in the cradle of the Arab world.

Last but not least, spare a thought for the rest of the world.

The authoritarian Arab regimes are all deeply unhappy about developments. At least the oil states can buy off the population. But if that doesn’t work, they do have a problem.

Then there’s the Chinese. That pesky Internet deal certainly worked magic in Egypt, and inflation is on the rise in China big time. Are the cards aligning for a new Tiananmen?

And there’s the West, full of the joys of Spring now that democracy is flowering in Cairo. Except that they don’t like the idea of real democracy, because it’s possible that once the Egyptian people don’t get the economic changes they seek in six weeks flat, they’ll once again turn on their time-honored enemy, the Jews, and demand, democratically, of course, that the peace is rescinded. The last thing the US wants is for its Egyptian Army allies to turn on the Israelis using US hardware. But at the same time, they do not want Pakistan on Israel’s doorstep and have to be seen to be doing the right thing. It’s a most vexing situation for old Barackslider.

All in all, pontificators like Thereisnoplan are having a whale of the time Egypt-watching.

Cameron and Multiculturalism – Let’s Unwrap the Word

Pudge Gets One Right

In most senses David Cameron is the worst kind of Tory an oily, pudgy, acceptable-to-the-people, snake oil salesman for regressive, wrong-headed Thatcherism. But the other day, he got one right. His speech about the failures of multiculturalism was very nearly pitch-perfect.

There are only two problems. The first is theoretical. The second is very, very practical.

First, the theoretical concern.

The use of word “multiculturalism” is a PC derived misnomer which couches the problem in a self-defeating concept. It suggests that in any given country all cultures operate on a level playing field.

They don’t.

There is always a dominant culture. The issue is whether states enable other cultures to exist alongside it, or whether one of the duties of citizenship is to assimilate to an acceptable level to the dominant culture. When the culture is that of an enlightened, free society, such as 21st century British society, borne as it is from hundreds of years of development, then an acceptable level of assimilation must be the goal.

The first world has to fight back. In order to protect its future it must express what it has to offer in explicit terms. But it must also be bold. It must make clear that citizenship is a contract. And part of that contract is to fulfill and contribute to the high standards of liberalism and free thinking that a first world culture offers to its citizens and expects in return.

Secondly, the practical issue.

Nice speech, Dave, but what exactly are you going to do about it?

Egypt: The Strange Case of the Self-defeating Revolution

Tahrir is a prison

Tahrir Square is starting to turn into a city within a city. It has its own pharmacist, food and power supplies, and makeshift police forces drawn from protestors. The military oversee entrance into the square, politely frisking protestors and sending them on their way to merrily pray and sing their hearts out.  Slowly but surely, the military will choke the life out of the rebellion, killing it with kindness rather than water cannon.

All this is rapidly becoming almost laughably ironic.

Instead of taking the revolution on the road and fomenting pressure for change in Alexandria and  other poor as all get out delta cities, it has been voluntarily contained. The pitched battles in Suez and other cities seem to be over. The police have gone underground again, and world journalists are now conveniently camped out in Tahrir, where they’re surrounded by the military.

Meanwhile, the US has signaled it supports a Suleiman-led ‘transition’ government, which means – as predicted – the military is asserting its authority and Mubarak will get to pass the mantle, painlessly, to the Army, which is banking the worldwide hashtag creators will move on to the next story during that ‘transition’.

What the army won’t do is throw out the baby with the bathwater. Too much democracy and there will be popular pressure to rescind the peace treaty with Israel, which if acted upon will mean the army has to go back to being a fighting outfit rather than a patronage and business-driven organization. That’s bad for an officer’s bottom line.

The outcome depends on the cohesion of the democracy protestors. Already, there are fissures developing between Islamist and secular groups, between moderates and radicals, between the bourgeoisie which has far more to lose than the poor. It’s the same old story of just about every revolutionary cycle. Do the middle class drivers of revolution lose control to the mob? The answer in this case will almost certainly be no. Not because the mob will be appeased and enfranchised so much as that the bourgeoisie will seek protection from a military establishment that will be only too glad to help.

In Tahrir Square right now, the military are in total control, protecting and isolating the demonstrators all at the same time. With a few bumps and bruises along the way, it’s likely that Tahrir will become a metaphor for the future of Egypt.

Despite all the soaring talk of emancipation, there simply aren’t enough voices in power who want it any different.

Egypt: Mubarak Gone. Short Term Hope. Long Term Calamity

Let’s have some fun.

Time to look at the prognosis for the major characters…

Hos Mubarak;

the embattled President and friend to the West, currently looking for cheap tickets out of Cairo on a variety of Internet travel sites. He’s said he won’t run for “re-election” in September, but the street wants him gone now. Cue power vacuum.

The Army:

Never looked better. Despite the fact that they’ve never won a single battle of any note, their F-16s, M-1 Tanks and new uniforms sure are shiny. And get this, all the protesters love them. With Mubarak on his way out, and the Army elevated to cabinet power by the old man, it’s no surprise that they’ve pre-emptively said they won’t fire on the demonstrators if Mubarak as a last ditch effort to stay in power should ask them. That pretty much seals it for old Hos. With the toys and the status, the Army has everything to lose from the “Arab Revolutionary Spirit” in Tahrir Square. What they’re looking for is something akin to the power enjoyed by the Turkish Army during and after Attaturk. Are they going to get it? Not without a fight. What they’re not looking for is a resumption of hostilities, cold or otherwise, with Israel. That would spell the end of the gravy from the US, which would not take kindly to the unwholesome possibility of US weaponry being used against the Jewish state.

Mohamed El-Baradei:

Expecting decades in the wilderness before shuffling off into history as the AEA chief who let the Iranians get real close to a nuke, instead Mohamed El-Baradei is shaping up to be Mr. Transition to Democracy. He’s got all the credentials. The Army love him, because he has no power base and doesn’t wear a uniform, the Muslim Brotherhood love him because he has no power base and doesn’t wear a uniform. And the Street will soon tire of him because he has no power base and doesn’t wear a uniform. Where does that leave him? Shuffling off into history as the IAEA chief who let the Iranians get real close to a nuke. Ironically, it’s his very weakness that could – in the short term – be his strength. He’s a figleaf and a good one. But it would take a supremely deft touch to turn his lack of power into real control.

The Egyptian Elite:

Pity the poor Egyptian elite. There they were happily building their gated communities and controlling everything with the help of Mubarak and the Army when suddenly, the mob decided to take matters into their own hands. In simple terms, there was growth in the Egyptian economy and a reduction in some key poverty indicators, but not nearly enough to dent the crushing poverty of a mass that’s growing at a huge rate. Simply put, if the US employment is having trouble keeping up with population growth, you can imagine the scale of the problem in Egypt, a nation with none of the democratic edifice, infrastructure, and economic generators. That will put pressure on the elite and leave them looking for protection. Who’s going to guarantee it? The answer is nobody, in public, but probably the Army – in tacit terms at least. Of course, if the elite is unhappy, the Egyptian economy is unhappy, and if the Egyptian economy is weak then the mob will start blaming, you’ve guessed it, the elite. If things start getting a little scary over the next couple of years, things might be looking up for luxury real estate in London.

The “Arab Revolutionary Street”

The Twitterati and Democracy-huggers in Europe and the US are already proclaiming the triumph of people power. For the cameras at least, there will be plenty to rejoice. Elections in September with new political parties, and lots of people with ‘purple-finger disease’ – otherwise known as total delusion that they’re embarking on a great democratic experiment. Much the same BS took place in Iraq and Afghanistan. But after that purple period is over, and nothing happens to tackle the crushing poverty and injustice faced by the millions in the Egyptian mass (or the skyrocketing bread prices brought on by demand and speculation), Allah will be right there to make everything alright, just like he does in Gaza with Hamas (the Palestinian offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood) and Lebanon with Hizbollah.

The Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood have played their cards very, very well. They know full well that if they’d been parading premature victory in Tahrir Square that the world would have panicked and backed a an army-sponsored transition to democracy. So they’ve stayed on the down-low, and in the short term are sitting very pretty. Come September, they’ll be a newly legitimized party that can say, “see, we’re not scary, we were just being persecuted by bad old Hos”. That’ll serve them very, very well at the ballot box, as will their rabid anti-Zionist stance that’s likely to surface as they get closer to elections. Figures vary as to their level of support, but it’s at least 20-25% and probably more like 40%. At that level they’ll at the very least be big power players, and could possibly win a plurality. On the surface this is a great time for them, but they’re likely to be victims of their own success. The reason is two-fold. Firstly, the Egyptian Party of God will have to “fix the sewers” and provide more temporal improvements for the masses, and secondly, more radical factions will demand a Sharia state and a state of war with Israel. If the latter don’t get what they want, they could very easily split off from and discredit the pragmatists, and then utilize terror, which would undermine the Egyptian state and economy, further exacerbating the chaos. The Brotherhood might not be able to resist its anti-zionist roots and renew connections with Hamas to arm its extreme factions in Gaza with more powerful rocketry to threaten Israel from a southern flank. Fun, huh?

The Prediction.

A clash between the radical elements of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Army Establishment seems likely.

The short term looks good.

The Army will oversee an explosion of parties and participation. There will be an orderly election. The moderates in the Muslim Brotherhood will prevail in the short term, probably in coalition with Egyptian secular nationalists. There will be a vast surge in expectations on the street – which will not be met, because Egypt doesn’t have the economic resources to solve its deep structural problems in anything less than decades.

The mid-term looks shaky.

Dissatisfaction will surge, and the more radical elements in the Brotherhood, furious that the pragmatists haven’t made the move to rescind the Peace Treaty with Israel will split from the group, or move it as a whole, and begin to appeal direct to the masses. There will be a rise in terrorism, fundamentalism, and investment in the country will drop like a stone, as will tourism, further exacerbating the economic problems and widening the vast expectation gap. Consistently high wheat prices will add fuel to the fire, as the mass – newly empowered – seeks to blame what they see as the slow pace of change on the democratically elected government.

The long term could be dangerous but the Army will stabilize the situation.

The Egyptian Army and rejuvenated security forces (sanitized by the new democratic vista) will take on the terrorist fundamentalist movement that may well complete the transformation of the Muslim Brotherhood from tactical pragmatists to wholehearted fundamentalists. The military wing of that group (vowing a return to direct action) will attempt to destabilize Egypt, and the security forces will fail to stop them, unless they return the nation – ironically – to a police state footing with the support of the people. If terrorism in Egypt becomes anything more than occasional, it will shatter tourism – 1/6 of the country’s GDP, and a major source of foreign exchange, and choke off investment. The Egyptian economy will continue to flounder, further undermining long-term stability.  A vicious spiral could begin. The street will demand change and the Muslim Brotherhood – with a major say in government – will require the end of the Israel peace treaty to guarantee its cooperation, and protect its newly found power. If that happens, the West will threaten to withdraw support for the military, which will respond by attempting to bury the Brotherhood, in order to maintain its power.

In short, we could be back where we started.