Democracy too has side-effects

Neither does an elected system automatically ensure truly ‘free’ polls nor is a supposedly democratic rule the answer to the many socio-political ills of the day, such as terrorism. Under certain conditions, such a system of governance can be harmful

When pro-democracy movements swept across Arabia last year, the world was caught largely unaware. In response, the international media — itself still trying to grasp the enormity of the situation — spun this narrative: After centuries of oppression, the people of Arabia had finally awakened; a peaceful revolution was underway; and democracy was around the corner. Across the world, everywhere the unrest in Arabia was romanticised as a popular uprising and lovingly tagged the ‘Arab Spring’.

Well, everywhere except  in the tiny Jewish state of Israel where the events were viewed and continue to be viewed with fear and anxiety. For a country surrounded by regimes whose official state policies call for its complete annihilation, additional instability in the neighbourhood is the last thing Israel needed. Hence, it comes as no surprise that in Israeli official discourse the popular protests are commonly referred to as the ‘Arab unrest’ or the ‘Arab upheaval’. A handful of those with a fondness for seasonal metaphors like to call it the ‘Islamist winter’ in response to the rise of Islamist regimes in the region that have replaced the secular and largely stable dictatorships of the past.

Egypt is a case in point. Here the autocratic, but still secular, regime of former President Hosni Mubarak has since been replaced by that of Mohamed Morsi. A mid-level functionary of the Muslim Brotherhood that was banned under the previous Government but now holds a majority in Parliament, Mr Morsi has nevertheless been appointed to that high office only after he won the first free and fair, multi-party election held in Egypt.

For Israel, this is problematic on many levels. First, the victory of the Muslim Brotherhood in itself is viewed as an existential threat — and perhaps, rightly so. Not only is the Brotherhood the same organisation that has nurtured top terrorists including present Al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri, it is also directly related to the terrorist group, Hamas, that governs the Gaza Strip and whose charter calls for the obliteration of Israel. It does not take a stretch of imagination to see why Israel fears that under the Muslim Brotherhood, its crucial peace treaty with Egypt will come under threat.

Additionally, there are also concerns regarding the increasingly lawless Sinai Peninsula. There are several reports that groups such as the Al Qaeda, are trying to ‘take over’ the region and create a terror haven of sorts. The crux of their strategy is to provoke Israel into launching retaliatory fire and eventually force the dismantling of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. It’s a no win situation for both Israel and Egypt.

Of course, there is some hope that the international community will work to prevent such a disaster and that Egypt’s own security imperatives will hopefully persuade the new regime to maintain the status quo. But there are no guarantees yet. While some believe that these new Arab regimes might eventually adopt the Turkish model of pragmatism towards Israel, others insist that the former might initially appear to be reconciliatory in nature but will eventually return to their hardline positions as they continue to consolidate power. Overall, there is no denying that security and counter-terrorism experts still have ample reason to be deeply concerned not just about Israel’s security situation but also about peace in West Asia in general.

To be sure, only time will tell how exactly things will unravel in Egypt but for now the situation provides for an interesting study in democracy, what it means to be one and whether or not it should be considered to be the magic potion for all the world’s political maladies. The first question that must be asked in this regard is does the conduct of free and fair elections alone constitute democracy? Or, should the conduct of such elections be viewed as a political means to achieve social goals such as inclusive, pluralistic society built on the universal values of justice, freedom and equality?

Take Mr Morsi’s appointment to the office of the Egyptian President as an example. That the election that brought him to power was free and fair is commonly acknowledged around the world. But is it as much a given that Egypt under his rule will be an open, just and free society for all its citizens including women and minorities? Or for that matter it will respect its peace obligations with neighbours including Israel? Unfortunately, the answer is a resounding no.

If anything, the situation in Egypt today looks eerily similar to that in the Gaza Strip in 2006. At that time, Hamas was elected to power after similarly free and fair elections following Israel’s pull out from the area in 2005. From the Israeli perspective, this provides for an understandably discomfiting situation not only because it must deal with a terrorist organisation on its borders but also because as a country that prides itself on being the only democracy in the region, it cannot look away from the fact that not just Hamas but now also the regime in Cairo indeed represent the popular will of their people.

For the international community, particularly in the West, such a situation presents what can only be described as the dilemma of defending democracy. It forces the world to also deal with the uncomfortable reality that elections alone don’t constitute democracy — there were elections during Mr Mubarak’s reign as well.  More importantly, it raises the issue of the abuse of democratic freedoms. It must serve as an impetus to the key question: What does the world do about regimes that grab power through democratic means only to eventually dismantle the democratic machinery of the state? 

There are no easy answers here but a good place to at least start the discussion in this regard is with the dispensation of the myths surrounding democracy. For instance, it is imperative to acknowledge that neither does democracy constitute ‘free elections’ nor is a supposedly democratic rule the answer to the many socio-political ills of the day, such as terrorism. In fact, if anything, it is crucial to realise that democracy under certain conditions can actually be bad.

(This article was published in the Op-ed section of The Pioneer on September 10, 2012.)