Egypt’s democratic transformation can only take place after serious reform within the ruling party. There can be no democracy without free and fair elections which, in turn, will not take place unless the ruling party is strong enough to compete with other parties on an equal platform, without the support of government institutions and security agencies.
The National Democratic Party’s (NDP) has been in power for almost 30 years – or more than half a century if we look at the party as a continuation of the hegemonic institutions established after 1952. If anything, this proves its refusal to accept any reform that may strip it of its power. Therefore in order to achieve democratic reform, the party must first prove that it can win fair elections.
Thus it’s not surprising that the country has been politically frozen for decades. Any reasonable opposition would push for strengthening the ruling party because this would pave the way for real democratic reform. In this case it would make no differcence how long the NDP remains in power as long as rotation of power is taking place.
Democracy advocates have been heartened by the NDP s reform agenda underway since its 2002 conference, despite the related contoversy related to the inheritance of power, to which the democrats paid little attention, not because they’re in favur of inheritance, but because they realize the issue is more complex than the way it is skewed in the tabloids.
More importantly, geniun democracy advocates believe that if the ruling party s growing role will ultimately lead to Gamal Mubarak’s ascension, it will also lead to political reform, which will limit the possibility of inheritance.
Democracy advocate also expect the NDP to evolve into a true ruling party that leads the government and dictates its direction rather than a supplemental agency giving it legititimacy.
The five years that followed the 2002 New Thought NDP conference had been disappointing, however. Yet the latest conference held early September could perhaps be seen as a small step towards the ruling party’s reformation.
Taking steps towards adopting the new vision of the NDP’s 2006 annual conference with regards to establishing a peaceful nuclear program, indicates that the hitherto stifled change may be imminent.
Yet at the same time, a few days after the conference, President Hosni Mubarak vetoed a government initiative to establish a new capital city, a plan rooted in NDP policy.
The government s proposal would redraw the map of Cairo in 2050, and in turn reestablish the relationship between the government and the party.
Yet the president’s failure to view this as a top priority has been a blow to our belief in the party s strengthening role and, hence, about the political reform program.
It is ironic that President Mubarak heads the same party whose proposed policies he later subverts by overruling the very decisions that would lend these policies credibility. That, in itself is an indication of just how far the NDP is from being a true ruling party.
One of the conditions of such a transformation is to limit institutionalization within the party. If the party s own president is unaware of its strategic policies until the moment the government decides to enforce them, it is clear that things are amiss within the NDP s organizational structure.
Betting on democratic reform through the ruling party must then be revised. The NDP faces many challenges, beginning with its historical baggage and bureaucratic institutions such as the Socialist Union, and ending with its leading figures who have vested interests in insulating the party from playing its role as an instrument for public service.
The NDP’s reform initiatives also late, arriving at a time of disintegration and conflicts within its leadership.
The relationship between the ruling party and the government must be regulated by clear rules, which are rare in Egypt, whether in the ruling system, the political arena or society in general.
Without such rules of engagement, one can only expect more conflicts, particularly at this moment disintegration which results largely from the fact that the president, who has weilded enormous power so far, is now lightening his grip.
It’s hard to imagine how a party weighed down by such conditions can transform itself from being a governmental puppet to a leading power in its own right, or from an agency supported by the government to an independent organization. Although there seems to be little reason to continue betting on democratic reform through this path, but for the time being, there seem to be no other meaningful alternatives.
Dr Waheed Abdel Meguidis an expert at Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.
