Egyptians go to the polls on Wednesday to elect a president from among 10 contenders, including the incumbent of 24 years, Hosni Mubarak. While few doubt the outcome will be his re-election, many are intensely following the process.
Some 6,000 domestic election monitors have been training for the event, while hundreds of foreign reporters are converging on the country this week. Although all the formal trappings of a true electoral contest are in place, important aspects of authenticity are glaringly absent.
Despite promises to the contrary, this is far from a level playing field. Mubarak still commands disproportionate assets: name recognition, a virtual monopoly on state-controlled electronic media and some 85 percent of the print media. As of one week before the poll, some opposition candidates had yet to air even one campaign ad on Egyptian television. All members of the presidential election commission are Mubarak appointees, and the new election rules eliminated any independent challengers.
Since the year 2,000, Egypt's 8,000 judges must supervise and certify election results, by ruling of the High Court. This was a major step toward fairer elections, as the judges' professional union has remained fairly independent over the past half-century of executive power grabs.
So the Mubarak regime has had to use various ploys to neutralize the judge's union. One was to stretch the definition of the judiciary' to include thousands of loyal government employees who have law degrees but no experience on the bench. This boxes in the true judges, for if they protest by boycotting their supervisory duties, the task will fall once more to police from the infamous Ministry of the Interior.
Thus, in the past, the judges' union tended to go along, with predictable results. In the 2000 parliamentary elections, while Mubarak's ruling party received roughly 38 percent of the popular vote in districts supervised by true judges, that percent somehow jumped to 86 percent where the quasi-judges were in charge.
This year promises to be very different. In the spring the judges held a nation-wide assembly and resolved that unless the regime granted them full independence, and exclusive oversight of the voting process they would not supervise the upcoming presidential (or parliamentary) races. On Friday they made their final demands: allow civil society groups to observe the voting process, stop interfering in the definition of legitimate judges for purposes of the election and agree that no ballot box will leave the presence of a legitimate judge until its contents are counted, certified and reported.
Thus far, a standoff looks likely, as the head of the presidential election commission has stated publicly on television that he refuses all citizen monitoring of the election process.
Other interesting developments on the eve of the election include a fierce public debate over whether to vote or to boycott the presidential race. Several opposition parties have called on their members to stay away in protest over restrictive election rules that strongly favor Mubarak. On the other hand, the Muslim Brotherhood, thought to be the single strongest opposition group in Egypt, are urging their followers to caste ballots and vote their conscience but not to give support to any "despotic, corrupt rulers." This is a clear if implicit repudiation of Mubarak, the sole ruler for 24 years.
Some 34 civil society organizations are preparing thousands of young people to monitor the elections despite repeated governmental objections. These groups argue that if the regime is not planning to rig the vote, then domestic as well as foreign observation of the polling process should not be a problem. The regime response is to say that any outside monitoring is an infringement on Egyptian sovereignty, and that domestic monitors are an affront to the integrity of the judges. That argument was quickly undermined when the judges' union announced their support for civil society monitors.
Whether the Mubarak regime is running scared because of the mounting challenges from within and without to hold a free and fair election, or is simply incapable of ridding the party of cheating as a way of life, the present signs do not bode well for Wednesday's polls. Meanwhile, Egyptians for the first time are experiencing the thrilling taste of defying tyranny, and enjoying some newly-found space for freedom.
Saad Eddin Ibrahim is director of the Ibn Khaldun Center in Cairo. Copyright: Project Syndicate
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on Tuesday returned from her visit to the US, where she had met with several US senators and representatives, think tanks, and overseas Taiwanese and Chinese communities, espousing her vision of promoting cross-strait dialogue as a way to evade war. On Monday last week, she sat down with US academic Orville Schell and Asia Society Policy Institute distinguished fellow Daniel Russel. Russel is a seasoned diplomat who has served in positions related to East Asian and Indo-Pacific affairs. At the conclusion of the discussion, Russel employed his considerable diplomatic experience and knowledge
I arrived in Taiwan when I was 18, fresh out of high school and trying to navigate university life. Everything felt unfamiliar. My broken Mandarin quickly revealed what I already knew: I was not from here. When I told people I was from Indonesia, many told me that I did not look Indonesian. This caught me off guard, not because it was cruel, but because of how casually it was said. Sometimes it came with curiosity, sometimes surprise, occasionally admiration for my “fair skin.” More often than not, the people asking meant no harm. It is understandable. I look ethnically
Nearly three decades after the 1997 handover, Hong Kong has become a paradox: a place where financial dynamism coexists with political repression — a reality Taiwan cannot afford to ignore. Despite a sharp contraction of civic freedoms since 2020, Hong Kong remains a major global financial center. It has recently overtaken Switzerland as the world’s largest offshore wealth hub, supported by steady inflows of capital from China and across Asia. The territory continues to serve as a key intermediary linking Chinese firms, multinational investors and global markets. Institutional continuity has played a role. The Hong Kong dollar’s peg to the
In the aftermath of China’s expulsion of the New York Times correspondent Vivian Wang (王月眉), Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lin Jian (林劍) has publicly and explicitly articulated Beijing’s core thinking on the Taiwan issue. Chinese authorities accused the newspaper of promoting what they called “Taiwan independence fallacies,” and said that its description of Taiwan as a country amounts to a challenge to the “one China” principle. The significance of the incident goes beyond the reporting dispute and has given the international community a window into the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) attitude toward Taiwan. Lin, in a statement, said
RSS