Recent happenings in Tunisia and Egypt are a way to gauge the situation in the Maghreb, wrote columnist Abdullah Iskandar in the pan-Arab daily Al Hayat.
Tunisia has almost completed a smooth transitional phase following the overwhelming vote of support by the National Constituent Assembly for the new constitution and following consensus on a technocratic government to lead the country through the upcoming elections.
Tunisians have thereby ensured that the constitution will unite the country in equality – especially between men and women – introduce political pluralism and guarantee public freedoms including freedom of religious belief, democracy, the primacy of law and accountability.
Several factors aided this. Above all, it reflected the persistence of civil society, through peaceful marches and demonstrations, rejecting all forms of terrorism and intimidation. The full neutrality of the military allowed civil society organisations to remain steadfast.
In addition, the political attitude of Ennahda, lawfully elected as the largest group in the Constituent Assembly, led it to try and impose its ideological and political hegemony. It courted groups and organisations that worked against pluralism and democracy.
But after noticing that the vast political and popular majority in Tunisia, which had stood up to the former regime, would not give in to a new kind of tyranny, Ennahda began re-thinking its strategy and offered concessions, including foregoing governmental monopoly and accepting a technocratic government for the rest of the transitional period.
In the meantime, Egypt – affected by instability and terrorist attacks – is moving towards the electing former Field Marshal Abdel Fattah El Sisi as president to replace Mohammed Morsi.
While the Tunisian branch of the Brotherhood is now an integral part of political life, the Egyptian arm has been declared a terrorist organisation and is being hunted down while Egypt heads towards electing an army officer, with the risks this poses to democracy and pluralism.
In Egypt, the situation had reached the point where the Muslim Brotherhood had shown no mercy in its monopoly and a limitless greed for power. Refusing to recognise the demands of the people, it resorted to constitutional announcements to circumvent the resistance of civil society, refusing any compromise with political, civil, democratic and liberal parties.
Following Mr Morsi’s ousting, they have fallen into a spiral of violence, in coalition with other terrorist organisations.
The Brotherhood has clearly adopted different approaches in both countries: one paved with violence and leading to its own defeat, while the other chose to step back and leave way to consensus.
El Sisi: an exceptional leader for the times
Egypt is on the right track and the roadmap that came out of the June 30 revolution is being implemented carefully, noted the Sharjah-based daily Al Khaleej in its editorial on Wednesday.
Completing the objectives set out in the roadmap will not be an easy task. Although the first phase, the creation and approval of a new constitution, did garner unprecedented support, it still has to be followed by presidential and legislative elections.
This will be carried out in light of an continuing war on terrorism and daily confrontations with the defunct Muslim Brotherhood group as they seek revenge against a population that rejected it.
A general feeling of reassurance is expected to overcome Egyptian public opinion as soon as General Abdel Fattah El Sisi’s candidature for the presidency is announced.
“Egyptian citizens are longing for a strong and capable leader and saviour; a man with a clear vision and a national rescue programme,” the paper added.
“Citizens need to look forward to a brighter future and all hopes are hanging on El Sisi to achieve the desired security and stability for Egypt.”
It is true that Egypt abounds with competent figures and decision-makers, but at this most exceptional junction, it needs an exceptional leader.
Gen El Sisi, who has proved his abilities and his belief in democracy and freedom, fits the bill.
Israel ‘ponders 85% West Bank withdrawal’
What if the Palestinian-Israeli talks that have been continuing secretly for six months were to fail to produce any positive outcomes? That was the question posed by columnist Mazen Hammad in the Qatari daily, Al Watan.
A recent study, announced last Monday, by the former head of Israeli intelligence, Amos Yadlin, found that Israel needs to be proactive and consider a unilateral withdrawal from 85 per cent of the West Bank.
“It is uncertain that the negotiations would culminate in success by the time their nine-month deadline expires at the end of April,” the writer said.
“Israel has a custom of changing its statements and its positions at any moment.”
Mr Yadlin’s study goes on to say that Israel should consider carrying out the unilateral withdrawal regardless of the Palestinians’ approval, and it should recruit the support of the US and powerful European states.
Strangely enough, Mr Yadlin’s plan sees that unilateral withdrawal is in any event better than the present situation.
Although the plan didn’t mention any details on essential issues such as Jerusalem, refugees and water, it can be seen as an “escape gate” for Israel should Palestinians insist on maintaining East Jerusalem as their capital city.
* Digest compiled by The Translation Desk
translation@thenational.ae
