Nepal’s squabbling political parties have squandered an opportunity to pass into law one of the most gender-friendly constitutions ever devised.

After four years of intense work, the 601-member Constituent Assembly (CA) missed a May 27 deadline to adopt a new constitution with political parties failing to agree on restructuring the country into a federation of states based on ethnic lines.

The CA was dominated by Maoists who waged a ten-year (1996-2006) civil war supported by the country’s many ethnic groups and lower castes that were, for centuries, marginalised by a feudal elite and a now defunct monarchy.

The biggest losers of the CA’s failure were Nepal’s women who saw the promise of equal rights dashed as the draft constitution – the key element in the peace process that followed the civil war ¬– had incorporated truly progressive laws.

A feature of the CA, dissolved on May 27, was that it had 197 women members from 20 political parties, the largest ever empowered political representation by women in the history of what was until 2008 a monarchy.

The female legislators had formed a ‘women’s caucus’ which was tasked with writing laws aimed at transforming the nation into a gender equal society.

“The women worked ceaselessly all these years to write laws, paying attention to detail so that no form of discrimination would exist,” caucus member Sapana Malla Pradhan tells IPS.

Pradhan, one of the country’s most prominent public interest litigation lawyers, had fought several landmark cases against gender discrimination over the past decade, forcing legal reforms on such controversial issues as marital rape and inheritance rights.

“Had the constitution been adopted, we could have ensured that women had rights equal to what the men enjoyed so far and what they had deprived Nepali women of,” she said.

Reforms envisaged in the draft constitution would have ensured 50 percent representation for women in every state organ and allowed women to be appointed as ambassadors in Nepal’s missions abroad.

“We would finally have had really progressive laws capable of impacting positively the socioeconomic situation of Nepali women,” independent development practitioner Srijana Pokhrel tells IPS.

Recognition would have been given to the economic value of domestic chores and a special constitutional act was being planned to allow calculation of household work as part of the gross national product.

New reproductive health laws would have obliged the state to allocate resources and financial aid to ensure safe motherhood in a country with one of the world’s highest maternal mortality rates.

More than 4,000 women die in Nepal annually due to pregnancy-related causes. There is a huge shortage of skilled birth attendants and the proportion of deliveries conducted by qualified health personnel is only 28 percent.

“We nearly achieved what Nepali women had been fighting for all these decades with all the political parties agreeing to every law proposed by the women’s caucus,” said Pradhan.

The country was to have a powerful women’s commission with members having the authority to investigate any gender-related violation by the state or individuals or any case of discrimination.

Among the most disappointed by the failure of the CA to produce a constitution are women from the oppressed ethnic groups and castes.

“Who do we turn to now for help? I had one last hope and that died last week,” says Urmila Chaudhary, a young woman from one of the most margnalised ethnic groups, the Tharus.

“This is really sad. We are now a country without a constitution,” says Tharu rights activist Krishna Chaudhary, director of Society Welfare Action Nepal, a non-government organisation (NGO).

“The laws prepared for women were especially targeted at those from the most marginalised communities where the rates of female illiteracy and poverty are high,” adds Krishna.

Krishna said his Tharu community had just begun to understand politics and was hopeful that the constitution would help them turn around their situation.

Nearly 90 percent of the four million Tharu people are landless, and the majority extremely poor with the women suffering exploitation.

Nepal’s women have come a long way in their history of fighting for their rights which started on Jul.1, 1932 when Yog Maya Neupane and 68 of her followers drowned themselves in the Arun river after being detained for demanding social justice and reform.

In 1951, when Nepal’s first constitution was written, it still carried features discriminatory to women and, although several reforms have been carried out since, the CA was the first real opportunity at progressive, implementable change.

For example, although Nepalis have the right to receive citizenship in the name of their mothers in principle, the law has never been seriously implemented.

“We have to pick up from where we left off… the democratic political process is absolutely the key,” said Pradhan optimistically.

(END)

If the life sentences for former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and one of his key allies were meant to placate Egyptians, they have had the opposite effect.

Shortly after the verdict, tens of thousands of Egyptians from across the politcal spectrum, with perhaps the exception of die-hard Mubarak supporters and supporters of presidential candidate and former Mubarak cabinet member Ahmed Shafik, filled the streets of Egyptian cities to voice their anger at the verdicts.

Northern cairo criminal court Judge Ahmed Refaat convicted Mubarak and Habib Al-Adly, the former head of Egypt’s interior ministry (MOI) merely of “failing to stop the killings.” Many Egyptians believe Mubarak and Al-Adly together with the state’s security services, were responsible for the killing of hundreds of protestors and the torture and detention of thousands more political detainees.

Senior members of the MOI, and commanders of the riot police who were seen firing on protestors from the tops of buildings surrounding Tahrir Square, were acquitted.

“We know that Mubarak and Al-Adly were not on the rooftops firing at protestors, yet somehow nobody is to blame for the shootings and killings despite forensic medical reports, witnesses, video footage and security log book evidence,” protest organiser Tarek El Halaby told IPS.

Within minutes of Saturday morning’s verdicts, clashes between protestors and riot police broke out near the court. Hundreds of Egyptians began filling downtown Cairo’sTahrir Square spontaneously, despite the blistering heat of the midday sun. By nightfall those hundreds had swelled into tens of thousands of chanting protestors, a scene repeated in cities and towns around Egypt.

This was the biggest turnout of protestors since the revolution. In scenes reminiscent of those heady and eventful days, young men began barricading Tahrir Square. All pedestrians who entered were searched and forced to show ID proof by revolutionary volunteers.

Protestors formed a human chain around Tahrir with secularists, Islamists, revolutionaries, football fans, Coptic Christians, young and old uniting in a show of solidarity. Many women were among the protesters.

The protests continued throughout the night, with hundreds settling in for what many see as a long battle ahead. Sunday morning traffic was again blocked by barricades as waves of protestors returned following a call by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) to its well organised supporters to take to the streets.

The mood on the streets is one of anger but also of defiance and determination, with the realisation that the revolution Egyptians have fought so hard for, and many have died for, could be slipping away.

“If we can keep this momentum until Jun. 6, and focus our message, we might succeed in getting Shafik disqualified. Step one,” said protestor Yasmine El-Rashidi.

This attitude of defiance is being echoed by other protestors who have called for a complete boycott of the run-off election due in mid-June. “The overwhelming majority of the Egyptian population will not take part in the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces’ (SCAF) elections. Join us and boycott this farce,” twittered activist Tarek Shalaby.

Another activist, Mahmoud Salem, expressed disappointment over the revolution’s shortcomings and the inability of some revolutionaries to see through the game of the military to cling to power.

El-Halaby who lost several of his friends in a protest outside Abbasiya military headquarters in Cairo last month sees a bloody road ahead. Eleven people were killed in that protest. Several had their throats slit and others were gunned down by unidentified assailants believed to be associated with the military.

“We know the former regime will not give up without a bloody fight and we expect more bloodshed in the future. We know are prepared for this because we know our freedom will not come easily,” El-Halaby told IPS.

The explosive situation in the street and anger of the protestors is expected to escalate when an appeal by Mubarak and Al-Adly’s lawyers against their life sentences is filed. Many Egyptians, including lawyers for those killed in Tahrir last year as well as Mubarak and Adly’s lawyers believe the appeal will be successful.

But despite events signalling that Egypt’s revolution is far from over, Egyptians haven’t lost their sense of humour. A current joke circulating in Tahrir Square is that Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad would happily give up power if he could be tried in an Egyptian court. (END)

“It was so frustrating but so exciting at the same time,” recalls 15-year-old Mariam Assam, a year-10 student in Cairo. Assam was recalling the days she tried to join protestors during the Egyptian revolution in January 2011 but was intially prevented by her parents who said street protests were no place for a girl to be.

“I wanted to be part of the revolution, to help Egyptians gain their freedom and women gain their rights, but unlike my brother I had to argue with my parents long and hard before they eventually allowed me out for a few hours,” Assam told IPS.

Assam who wants to be a journalist one day, is from a new generation of Egyptian women better educated than their mothers and grandmothers, and who believe unequivocally in equality for women despite the restrictions many families impose.

She struggles with such cultural constraints but believes, like several other Egyptian women from varying backgrounds IPS spoke to, that the revolution will ultimately be good for women.

Rina El Masry, 40, is an immaculately groomed businesswoman. She is the daughter of a Coptic Christian mother and Muslim father. Like Assam she doesn’t wear the hijab.

“I believe the ceding of power to Egypt’s interim military government was a step in the right direction for womens’ rights despite the number of female parliamentarians dropping to the current two percent under the military as opposed to the 12 percent under deposed former president Hosni Mubarak,” El Masry told IPS. “All democracies evolve.”

Under Mubarak special quotas were reserved in parliament for women. And women were given particular rights. Egyptian women, unlike many women in the rest of the Arab world, can sue for divorce without having to prove maltreatment.

Egyptian women married to foreigners can pass their citizenship on to their children, which is not the case in more socially liberal Lebanon. Egypt’s females are not subject to the Sharia dress code. Divorced Egyptian women are awarded custody of their children until they are 15, as opposed to age seven for boys and nine for girls regionally.

When the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) took over, the female parliamentary 64-seat quota was overturned, and constitutional amendments were formulated without the imput of women.

SCAF also subjected a number of female protestors to beatings and virginity tests, while refusing to allow women to head governates and municipalities throughout the country. The right of women to sue for divorce without having to prove maltreatment is also under review.

Mariam Kirollos, 22, is a Coptic Christian, and member of the Egyptian Feminists Union. The group has been conducting brainstorming meetings to strategise a way forward for womens’rights under the new government. Kirollos agrees with El Masry that revolutionary change will ultimately benefit women.

“Despite the setbacks after SCAF took over the revolution is still ongoing. Womens’voices are now being heard. We are no longer silent. Issues that have been swept under the carpet for too long are now in the public domain and being discussed by civil society,” Kirollos told IPS.

While the three women from disparate backgrounds all voice hope towards equality for women becoming a reality in Egypt, all are also united in their fear of the Muslim Brotherhood and other conservative elements sweeping to power. They acknowledge that the fight ahead will not be easy.

At a mass protest by Egyptian women in Cairo shortly after Mubarak’s overthrow, women were booed, shoved and told to go back home by groups of men. During parliamentary elections earlier in the year, conservative Islamists took a lion’s share of the seats.

Muslim Brotherhood presidential candidate Muhammad Mursi opposes women being allowed to serve in the presidency. He has called for implementation of Islamic law and, at campaign rallies, referred to Islam’s holy book, the Quran, as the constitution.

But Egyptian feminists are up against more than Islamist politicians. A large portion of Egypt’s population is politically and socially conservative. That includes many women: 30 percent of women are unable to read or write.

Egyptian feminists have argued that these women were coerced into voting for conservative elements, and were unable to understand the implications of what they were supporting. Against this background was the excellent social services provided by the Muslim Brotherhood for the poor and illiterate, where a good portion of the Brotherhood’s support comes from.

But is it not just poor and illiterate women who lean towards religiously conservative views. And not all men do. “My father gives me far more understanding and freedom than my mother does,” Assam told IPS. (END)

Like the delayed after-effects of an earthquake below the ocean before the subsequent tsunami hits adjacent coastlines, Egyptian anger finally exploded this week after several days of stunned silence following the controversial results of Egypt’s first-round of presidential elections.

The headquarters of Ahmed Shafik, the last serving prime minister in the hated regime of former president Hosni Mubarak was set on fire and vandalised by an angry mob Monday night. Vocal marchers headed downtown to Talat Harb square while fights broke out in Tahrir Square where crowds gathered to protest the election results.

Results from the first round of voting saw Muhammad Mursi from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) secure first place, closely followed by Shafik, who ran as an independent. The two will contest a run-off election on Jun. 16 and 17.

Secular leftist and Nasserite, Hamdeen Sabahi, came in third, while former MB member and moderate Islamist Abdel-Moneim Abolfotoh came in fourth.

While many revolutionaries are secular and against the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), special contempt is reserved for Shafik who has shown no remorse for the behaviour of the Mubarak regime, and is allegedly supported by the interim military government.

Shafik has also promised to resort to extreme force against protestors in order to “reestablish security and order” should he be re-elected.

The delayed anger of the protestors was due to disbelief that the political freedom they had fought so hard for during the revolution last year had left them to choose between a bad and a worse candidate.

“We are stuck between two right-wing conservative powers – the military and the Brotherhood,” said Hosni Abdel Rahim, a student movement leader and a member of Egypt’s small Democratic Front (DF) party, a socialist-oriented movement comprising intellectuals.

“Young people are now very angry as they feel they have nothing to lose. The economy is on the verge of collapse, employment opportunities are limited and now the one issue they put their hope into, their political freedom, hangs in the balance. This is a very incendiary situation,” Abdel Rahim told IPS.

The belittling of the revolution and its supporters by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), supported by a sycophantic media, have added to the revolutionaries’ woes.

The MB for its part mobilised its well organised supporters and civil society bases to win votes while the supporters of Shafik relied on well-funded resources. Supporters of the revolution had access to neither of these essential elements.

The palpable anger and confusion of Egyptian activists is being compounded by their inability to unite. Activists are torn between voting for Islamist Mursi despite their misgivings about the MB and the remnants of the old regime.

This was evident as IPS attended a meeting called by founders of the DF to formulate a strategy for the course of action over the next few weeks.

Moehsien Rashad said that supporting the MB is an interim strategy. “At least at this point we can pressure Mursi and the MB who control parliament to formulate a new constitution to show they differ from the previous regime. This pressure can’t be applied to Shafik under whom the system will remain unchanged,” Rashad told IPS.

However, Rashad’s friend and DF colleage Ibrahim Nawar believes the MB is the most dangerous threat to the Egyptian state and poses a far higher risk than voting for Shafik.

“Once they are in power they will transform the country into a theocratic Islamic state which is part of their platform. This happened during the Iranian revolution when Iran’s theocracy supporters made promises to civil society to implement civil law but when they swept to power reneged and forced a theocracy on all Iranians,” Nawar told IPS.

“The Brotherhood has betrayed the country over the last 15 months. They only joined the revolution at a later stage in the hope of milking it for political mileage. They also sided with the military in clamping down on the rights of protestors and mulled constitutional changes without consulting other political parties,” added Nawar.

Other activists, meanwhile, are showing their disdain for the elections by urging a boycott of the run-off in June. This attitude was evident during the first round with over 50 percent of Egyptians not voting.

DF secretary-general Wael Hossam is ambivalent about who to support. “I think there was a lot of political engineering involved in the recent results including voting irregularities. The Presidential Electoral Commission (PEC) has refused most electoral appeals stating they were not legally based or were lodged too late,” Hossam told IPS.

Several international monitors said they felt more like observers than monitors because PEC restrictions surrounding their monitoring were extremely strict and electoral changes were prohibited.

However, despite the divisions Egyptians appear united in promising to take to the streets should Shafik win the run-off. Simultaneously, some fear a military coup if their alleged candidate loses and the Brotherhood takes over. (END)

Serbs awoke on Monday morning to a regime change. A close ballot in the presidential run-off Sunday spelled the end for incumbent Boris Tadic, who served two terms as head of the Democratic Party that toppled former dictator Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, as Serbs cast their votes for the populist Tomislav Nikolic, who begins his five-year term today.

Nikolic (60) heads the populist Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) and his victory was described last night by analysts as “a political earthquake”, leaving swathes of the public in shock as the long-celebrated Democratic Party stepped down.

The Democrats began the process of ending Milosevic’s bloody Balkan wars of the 1990s, which took more than 100,000 lives.

But even a glorious past could not secure Tadic’s popularity against the wave of economic and political hardship that has gripped the country since the latter came to power in 2004, analysts say.

“The loss of presidency (for Tadic) came as a result of enormous dissatisfaction among the people, as the economic and social situation has (deteriorated) in the past years, with the President and his (ruling) party doing little to ease the burden,” analyst Ognjen Pribicevic told IPS. “Besides, all these hardships are accompanied by growing accusations of corruption that is eating away at the substance of society,” he added.

Unemployment in Serbia has stood stubbornly at 24 percent for years now, the highest in decades, while Serbian tycoons from the grim 90s era have flourished under the new rulers, privatising hundreds of companies and then leading them into bankruptcy due to a lack of international investment, particularly since 2008.

Impoverished state coffers led to the decay of the health care system, education and social services. In an effort to improve the situation, Serbia began borrowing money and ended up with a foreign debt of 31 billion dollars for a nation of 7.3 million people.

The first sign of widespread dissatisfaction with Democrats came two weeks ago in the parliamentary elections and first round of presidential elections. Tadic’s party obtained 23 percent of the votes, while Nikolic’s Progressives came in as the single biggest party with 24 percent, unable, however, to form a coalition government.

The new Serbian government will be formalised next month, comprised of Tadic’s Democrats, Socialists and a small Liberal-Democratic party.

“We’ll have a cohabitation in the future, with a Progressive president and a government again headed by the Democrats,” analyst Misa Brkic told IPS. He believes this won’t be a bad thing, with opposing sides acting as a system of checks and balances against one another.

The poll booths saw an extremely low turnout on Sunday, with barely 45 percent of the electorate turning up to cast a vote. Still, Nikolic won 49.8 and Tadic 47 percent of the votes.

“(Tadic) was punished by former Democrat supporters – the intellectuals (and) middle class,” political analyst Jovo Bakic told IPS.

“They expressed clear antipathy to the Democratic Party’s practices in the past years – including nepotism (and) favouritism of close presidential aides. Tadic did exactly what Milosevic did in his final years, concentrated power around him, and the majority of voters expressed their disgust by not going to the polls at all,” he added.

According to the constitution, the President of Serbia has no executive powers – rather, he or she is expected to objectively represent the nation at home and abroad, sign and thus approve laws adopted by Parliament, name ambassadors and receive foreign ambassadors and decide on a number of state matters.

But as far as the broader Serbian public was concerned, Tadic had long overstepped those boundaries.

In his victory speech, Nikolic said he would “adhere to the Constitution and respect institutions”, in a clear reference to widespread opposition to Tadic’s abuse of power.

According to analyst Slavisa Lekic, “Tadic’s interference was visible in the work of government (institutions), courts and (much more).”

“Part of the intellectual public wanted to sacrifice Tadic for the improvement of democracy,” Lekic said.

“I want a normal Serbia, a country where one day I can be replaced,” Nikolic said last night, in a nod to the democratic future he has promised.

Nikolic also said, “Serbia will not stray from its European path,” since the nation secured European Union candidacy last March.

He added that his priorities now were “Moscow, Brussels and Washington, not certainly in this order,” as he was willing to cooperate with European nations and the United States, but also with Russia, considered one of Serbi’s “traditional” political allies.

Nikolic added that he would ask for a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel since “Germany is Serbia’s main ally in the European Union.”

“I will nourish good relations with all our neighbours,” Nikolic said, referring to the fact that post-war relations between the countries of former Yugoslavia are still seeing their ups and downs.

“Serbs and Croats should live in peace,” he said about the two biggest nations of former Yugoslavia that were at war in the beginning of the 90s.

(END)

Demonstrations in Tahrir Square are now against rising prices. Credit: Khaled Moussa al-Omrani/IPS

By Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa al-Omrani
CAIRO, May 18 2012 (IPS)

More than 15 months after Egypt’s Tahrir Square uprising and four months after free parliamentary polls, many Egyptians say that daily living conditions are worse now than they were in the Mubarak era.

“Conditions for the average Egyptian have become worse – economically, socially and in terms of security – than they were before the revolution,” Egyptian analyst Ammar Ali Hassan tells IPS.

Since the popular uprising early last year which saw the Mubarak regime replaced with a ruling military council, Egyptians have complained of steadily rising prices for a number of strategic commodities. These include basic foodstuffs – sugar, rice, cooking oil – and vital fuels, such as butane, diesel and gasoline.

“Over the course of the last year, prices at the market have skyrocketed inexcusably. One kilogram of tomatoes just jumped from one to five pounds overnight (one Egyptian pound is 16 U.S. cents),” says Tarek Moussa, a 34-year-old employee at a local trading company. “My monthly salary is now barely enough to keep food on the table for my wife and two children.”

The steadily rising cost of living has been accompanied by supply shortages, especially of fuels used for transport and cooking.

In Cairo, recent months have seen long lines at gas stations – frequently stretching around the block – due to weeks-long gasoline shortages. There have also been frequent reports of fights breaking out over butane gas cylinders, used for cooking by most Egyptian households, which are also in increasingly short supply.

“My transportation costs have jumped sharply because bus and microbus drivers have all doubled their prices due to the chronic shortage of gasoline,” says Moussa. “Given my low salary, it’s become more cost- effective to simply not go to work.”

Along with these deepening economic grievances, many Egyptians also complain of an ongoing post- revolution security vacuum and its effects on domestic security.

At the height of last year’s uprising, the Mubarak regime withdrew Egypt’s police forces nationwide, leaving domestic policing responsibilities in the hands of the military – which has done little to stop the resultant upsurge in crime. Police forces have yet to be redeployed at pre-revolution levels.

In the streets of the capital, muggings – an infrequent occurrence during the Mubarak era – have now become commonplace. Automobile theft appears to have become one of the country’s few growth industries.

The lack of domestic security, in tandem with ongoing regional turmoil, has also taken its toll on Egypt’s once thriving tourism sector, which has traditionally represented a leading employer and primary source of foreign currency. According to Egypt’s tourism ministry, annual tourism revenue fell from some 12.5 billion dollars in 2010 to some 8.8 billion dollars in 2011.

On Apr. 20, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators from across the political spectrum converged on Cairo’s Tahrir Square to voice longstanding grievances, chief among them the worsening standard of living.

Hassan, however, is quick to stress that Egypt’s deepening economic and security woes should not be blamed on last year’s uprising.

“The revolution, which liberated Egyptian political life after more than 30 years of autocracy, should not be blamed for deteriorating conditions,” he says. “The current deterioration is a direct result of the military council’s failure to properly administer Egypt’s ongoing transition to democracy.

“Had the ruling military establishment adopted a few simple measures, living conditions would be better today. It should have worked harder to ensure domestic security, prevent market monopolies, stimulate the economy and recover public funds pilfered by the former regime.”

Hassan does not rule out the possibility that the negligence is intentional. “These conspicuous failures might reflect the military’s lack of political and administrative experience, or hasty decision-making. Or they could be premeditated with the aim of discrediting the revolution and its ideals.”

The ruling military council has repeatedly vowed to hand over executive authority to Egypt’s next head of state after presidential elections are held later this month.

Voicing a common opinion, Magdi Sherif, head of the centrist Guardians of the Revolution Party, attributes Egypt’s worsening living conditions to the fact that “most, if not all, of Egypt’s key economic activity remains in the hands of former regime elements.”

Sherif attributes the ongoing security vacuum to a “fifth column of Mubarak regime holdovers who remain in charge of the interior ministry, which has actively worked – and continues to work – to promote instability and discredit the revolution.”

Both men, however, also place blame – albeit to a lesser extent – on Egypt’s post-revolution political powers. These include Islamist parties, which together now hold more than three-quarters of the seats in parliament, along with their liberal and leftist counterparts.

“Egypt’s economic situation wouldn’t be so bad if the Islamist parties used their newfound power in parliament to press for outstanding revolutionary demands, like passing antitrust legislation and raising the minimum wage,” says Hassan. “Instead, they’re using their parliamentary clout to jockey for power with the ruling military council.”

Sherif, for his part, is quick to point out that post-revolution Egypt is in its “political adolescence”.

“And this adolescence extends to all political factions: the Islamists, the liberals, the revolutionaries,” Sherif tells IPS. “This is a primary reason for the current political deadlock – most political forces are putting their own narrow interests above those of the nation.”

Meanwhile, candidates in Egypt’s upcoming presidential election, slated for May 23/24, have lined up to promise would-be voters an improved domestic security environment, better living conditions and rapid economic development.

“Central planks of my electoral programme include re-establishing security, raising pensions and the minimum wage, stimulating the economy with large development projects and improving public health and education services,” Amr Moussa, former Arab League chief and presidential frontrunner, tells IPS.

“Candidates are promising to solve all the country’s problems,” says Sherif. “But Egypt’s next president better deliver or he could have a second revolution on his hands.” (END)

Election posters in Cairo. Credit: Cam McGrath/IPS

By Cam McGrath
CAIRO, May 15 2012 (IPS)

One is a conservative Islamist attempting to reinvent himself as a pragmatic liberal, the other is a secular statesman trying to distance himself from the authoritarian regime he once served. Both aspire to be Egypt’s first civilian president.

Thirteen candidates are competing to fill the vacancy left by former president Hosni Mubarak following his ouster in a popular uprising 15 months ago. With polling just weeks away, two unlikely front-runners have emerged: Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, a former leader of the previously-banned Muslim Brotherhood, and Amr Moussa, a career diplomat who rose to prominence as Mubarak’s foreign minister.

The historic election is scheduled for May 23-24, with a run-off to be held in June if no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which has ruled Egypt since Mubarak’s ouster, has promised to hand over power to a new president by Jul. 1.

A poll by local think tank Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies shows Moussa in the lead with 39 percent of participants’ votes, and Aboul Fotouh in second place with 24.5 percent. Other polls show the two candidates running neck and neck, with many Egyptians still undecided on how they will vote.

“The backgrounds of each of the (two leading) candidates will influence this election,” says political analyst Moustafa Kamel El-Sayed. “Both have pasts that worry voters.”

Moussa, who served as Mubarak’s foreign minister from 1991 to 2001, has faced intense scrutiny over his ties to the former regime since he declared his intention to run for president more than a year ago. Critics have labelled him “feloul”, a pejorative term for remnants of Mubarak’s authoritarian regime.

The 75-year-old statesman has tried to play down his role in Mubarak’s corrupt and often brutal administration, painting himself as an outsider and dissident voice. Yet it was his decade as the regime’s most senior emissary that made him a household name.

As foreign minister, Moussa’s eloquent and edgy speeches criticising Israel earned him immense popularity with the Egyptian street and were the inspiration for the 2001 Arabic pop hit, “I Hate Israel (and I Love Amr Moussa).” It is widely accepted that Mubarak’s insecurity over Moussa’s rising celebrity status was behind his decision to shuffle him to the largely decorative Arab League that same year.

Critics say Moussa’s decade at the helm of the Arab League revealed his political character. They charge that his rousing speeches, particularly his anti-Israeli rhetoric, were geared purely for public consumption, and rarely accompanied by policy or action.

“Moussa is a populist,” says leftist activist Mohamed Fathy, who has yet to decide on a candidate. “His image as (an Arab) nationalist who hates Israel resonates with many Egyptians, but it’s hard to know where he really stands on the issues or how he would rule.

“His links to the old regime and the (deference he has shown to) the SCAF are worrying to say the least,” he adds.

Moussa’s opponents have challenged his record during the uprising that toppled Mubarak, claiming he never publicly criticised the dictator until his ouster was imminent. He further alienated revolutionaries by labelling youth protesting the abuses of the ruling military council as “thugs and anarchists.”

Even his iconic hatred of Israel has been called into question as leaked documents show he once supported plans to sell gas to the Israeli government. Moussa claims he approved the unpopular deal only because it would help the besieged Palestinians obtain their energy requirements.

The former diplomat has campaigned vigorously across Egypt, selling himself as the only candidate with the political experience to lead Egypt from day one as president. Many Egyptians see him as the only secular contender with enough constituent support to win – which would keep the Islamists, who already control parliament, from taking the presidency as well.

“I don’t think people believe Moussa stood against Mubarak or will be any different,” says Yasser El- Sharkawy, a waiter at a Cairo café. “I think most of his support comes from people who fear an Islamist president more than (an authoritarian one).”

Moussa’s chief rival in the race, Aboul Fotouh, was a founding member of Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya, a once- militant Islamist group still regarded by the U.S. government as a terrorist organisation. The 60-year-old physician later joined the Muslim Brotherhood and was a member of its influential Guidance Bureau for over two decades.

Those close to Aboul Fotouh claim his hard-line views have softened over the years, which led to a falling out with the Brotherhood’s hawkish leadership. He has, for instance, stated that women and Coptic Christians should have the right to run for president – a position that put him at odds with his more conservative peers.

Aboul Fotouh was ejected from the Muslim Brotherhood in July 2011 after declaring his intention to run for president despite the group’s pledge that it would not field a candidate.

Fortune has shaped his political trajectory. In less than a year the former radical has engineered a stunning political transformation, casting himself as a “liberal” Islamist and inspiring an unlikely mix of followers: secular-minded youth, leftist thinkers, disillusioned Muslim Brotherhood members and hardcore fundamentalists.

His support has swelled with the endorsement of an influential Salafi (ultra-conservative Islamist) group following the disqualification of their hard-line candidate.

Moussa mocked his rival’s apparent contradiction during a televised presidential debate last Thursday.

“He is a Salafi with Salafis, and a liberal with liberals,” he said.

Political analyst El-Sayed says attempts to portray Aboul Fotouh as a liberal are “absurd”. His disagreements with the Muslim Brotherhood’s leadership were primarily over his calls to reform the 84- year-old movement’s autocratic internal governance, not over progressive views on religion and society.

“Aboul Fotouh’s views, particularly on the application of Sharia (Islamic law), show he is still very much a conservative Islamist,” El-Sayed told IPS.

Yet many of Aboul Fotouh’s supporters remain convinced that he is the genuine item: a pious, reform- minded presidential contender who respects women, religious freedom, and democracy. And unlike Moussa, his revolutionary credentials and opposition to the former regime are incontrovertible.

“If an official from the old regime is elected president the revolution has failed,” says El-Sharkawy.

(END)

Kosmas Bitros (29) didn’t “believe in politics and in elections as a way of changing society”. Still, he showed up at the ballot boxes for the first time last Sunday to cast a vote against austerity in the Greek national elections.

Though he did not identify with one particular party, Bitros believed it was a matter of great urgency to bring down the two-party regime, comprised of PASOK and the New Democracy (ND) party, which has dominated Greek politics for the last 30 years.

He cast his vote for the Coalition of the Radical Left, or Syriza and went out with friends. At night they gathered together to watch the results and for the first time ever Bitros witnessed what he had believed was impossible: Syriza was coming second with 16.7 percent of the vote, just behind the right wing ND, with 18.8 percent.

“The (old regime) was corrupted, they have destroyed the country and they didn’t want to give up power,” Bitros told IPS.

“When the (economic) crisis came, I realised how defenseless we are, how they are playing with our lives without care.”

Although he was hesitant to vote, believing his actions to be of little consequence, he finally understood that politicians “cannot destroy democracy completely. You have to use even the most marginal chance you have to push things where you want to see them, not let go,” Bitros added.

The outcome of the election proved that scores of other Greeks felt exactly the same way.

The size of the ‘protest vote’ in Greece was directly proportional to the level of frustration among ordinary people in the country whose lives have been turned upside down by sweeping cuts in public spending mandated by the so-called austerity programme that has gripped the country since May 2010.

Guided and coerced by the Troika – the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank – Greek politicians slashed pensions, government salaries and public services in an effort to close the country’s massive deficit and receive billions of dollars in bailout loans from the international community.

Rather than pull the country out of recession, the austerity era ushered in an unemployment rate of 22 percent, as well as a new class of poor, disenfranchised and desperate Greeks, who turned out in droves over the weekend to demolish the two traditional political forces in the country.

The former socialist-turned-neoliberal PASOK party went from 43.9 percent of support in 2009 to just 13.5 in this election; while the ND, notorious for being the party that governed the country from 2004 to 2009, also experienced a huge drop in popularity.

“The protest vote was an anti-bailout vote,” economist Leonidas Vatikiotis told IPS. “The election produced a fragmented political environment that gave rise to political forces of the left and the right, and brought into the parliament the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn,” a party that has risen from a marginal fascist group to a parliamentary party with seven percent support.

“You look at the picture after elections and understand that people do not trust austerity as a solution. Three years of austerity have pushed the country’s debt from 125 billion to 165 billion. Public finance consolidation has not happened despite the remarkable sacrifices people have put up with. In the end, we do not believe in austerity and Europe needs to get that message,” Vatikiotis stressed.

News of François Hollande’s victory in France fueled optimism in Greece that an alternative coalition could renegotiate the terms on which Greece settles its debt with the outside world, particularly with the international financial institutions (IFIs).

Europe on edge

European officials are extremely alarmed by the prospect of an anti-bailout front being formed in Greece, and of a European swing against austerity following elections in Greece and France.

On Tuesday German officials responded by issuing several warning statements in the international press. Chancellor Angela Merkel personally excluded the possibility of renegotiating the European public finance agreement put in place at the end of last year, which imposes very strict rules on how member states run their public finances, as well as severe penalties for those who fail to comply with the so-called regulations.

The country is expected to face enormous pressure at the beginning of next week when the Council of the European Ministers of Finance (ECOFIN) convenes in Brussels.

European Commissioner Jose Manuel Barosso, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and Vice- President of the Commission, Olli Rehn, rushed to warn the country that if Greece failed to observe commitments made in the bailout agreement, its status in the eurozone would be at stake.

German finance minister Wolfgang Schauble was more succinct, saying the country could not “have the euro without the austerity agreement. If it seriously observes its commitments then we will observe ours as well. But if Greece decides not to stay in the eurozone, we are not able to coerce it.”

Europe bureau chief for the U.S.-based McClatchy news service, Roy Gutman, has described the German official’s words as “a direct intervention into another country’s politics. The German finance minister goes beyond commenting on political developments in Greece to telling the people there what he wants them to do,” he said to IPS.

Meanwhile, inside the country, leaders of the pro-austerity coalition have warned that the anti-bailout rhetoric and promises made by Syriza’s leader, Aleksis Tsipras, are jeopardising progress in the country, for which millions of Greeks have made huge sacrifices in recent years.

For now it seems that no amount of scare tactics and criticism can turn the tide of support away from Syriza. The latest poll leaked to the press two days ago shows the party’s popularity increasing by the day.

Perhaps the only thing that could reverse the momentum would be the formation of a national salvation government, which PASOK leader Evangelos Venizelos has invited all parliamentary parties to do. He is also pushing ahead with efforts to prevent a head-on collision with Brussels and Berlin; but time is running out.

According to the constitution, if talks convened by Greek President Karolos Papoulias fail to produce a coalition government by the beginning of next week, the country will be forced back to the polls in a month’s time. So far, neither side has budged.

“European officials and Greek politicians should think seriously about the fact that the Greek political stalemate might lead us into a head-on confrontation between anti and pro-austerity forces,” said Vatikiotis.

“The fear of punishment has coerced Greeks into accepting austerity but after Sunday’s elections this bond has been broken. More coercion of this kind now might produce unpredictable results.”

If it comes down to it, he said, people will realise that the choice before them in a second election will not be between parties that are for or against austerity but between a sovereign, democratic country or a future in the eurozone.

(END)

As campaigning for the Apr. 1 poll in Burma (also Myanmar) gets into full-swing, there are misgivings on whether the National League for Democracy (NLD) party of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will get a fair deal.

NLD spokesman Nyan Win at a Feb. 20 press conference in Rangoon. Credit:Mizzima

The election is a test of strength between the liberals who support President Thein Sein’s reform agenda, and hardliners who seem intent on derailing the reform process, despite publicly declaring support for it.

Already NLD spokesman Nyan Win has complained of difficulties in getting permission to use public venues for its meetings. “We want fair play, but restrictions have lately increased. We hope the government keeps its word and allows a free and fair election,” he told IPS.

Suu Kyi, however, needs no venues and thousands of supporters and well-wishers flock her routes to catch a glimpse of the iconic figure who spent most of the last 20 years under house arrest.

Everywhere the reception has been the same, with adoring crowds yelling their support for the Nobel peace laureate who led the NLD to a landslide victory in 1990 – only to be thwarted by the military which refused to hand over power.

“She’s treated like a pop star,” said freelance journalist Min Thu who has been following her entourage. “The excitement is overwhelming as people want to see her, waive to her, and for those close enough, to touch her.”

“Now we can have democracy,” said Aye Win, a retired schoolteacher in Rangoon. “When she is elected she will help end poverty and repression in the country,” she told IPS over email.

The NLD is contesting almost all the seats – 40 in the lower house, six in the upper house and two in the provincial assemblies.

While this represents less than 15 percent of the seats in the national assembly – 440 seats in the lower house and 224 in the upper house – the results are less important than the way in which the polls are conducted.

“Suu Kyi’s decision to run for parliament is an extremely important move for the future of the country,” said Prof. Sean Turnell, a Burma specialist at Macquarie University, Australia, who recently visited the country.

“She is uniquely placed to drive reform forward and bring on board a substantial constituency to help maintain that momentum,” Turnell told IPS.

United States secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, stressed the need for the by-elections to be free and fair when she met government leaders in December in the capital of Naypyidaw.

Since then the mantra has been constantly repeated. United Nations human rights envoy, Tomas Ojea Quintana, on his mission there last month, said that any rolling back sanctions was dependent on the conduct of the by-elections.

“We have taken the necessary measures so that the upcoming by-elections will be free, fair and credible,” speaker of the lower house, Shwe Mann, told European Union development commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, last week.

Piebalgs, who announced a new 150 million euro (198 million dollars) aid package for Burma, said in a statement that the purpose of his visit was “to assess the ongoing reforms and encourage their continuation.”

However, many leaders of the army-backed, ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) are not happy and there is evidence that they are trying to scupper the NLD’s campaign.

This became evident a few weeks ago when Suu Kyi wanted to speak to her supporters in Mandalay. The EC gave her permission to speak, but she was not allowed the use of the main stadium there to address the rally.

On her first trip to the Dawei industrial zone in southern Burma it became clear that former fisheries minister and USDP central executive member, Maung Maung Thein, had warned residents that if they did not vote for the USDP they would lose their jobs, sources told IPS.

Maung Maung Thein has considerable business interests in the area – especially in the fishing industry – and he has also been accused of colossal corruption.

All along the main road in Suu Kyi’s constituency of Kawmhu on the outskirts of Rangoon there are big, colourful billboards giving credit to the USDP for infrastructure projects, medical centres and schools built by the government.

This may not dissuade voters from electing Suu Kyi, but may influence voting in other parts of the country.

The pro-democracy leader is not anxious to cry foul. “We have certainly come across a few hitches in the last couple of weeks with regards the campaign of the NLD,” she told reporters.

“We hope that these will be sorted out because free and fair elections depend on how a campaign goes, not just how people are allowed to cast their vote on the day itself,” she said.

“The problem is access to resources, and when so much is at stake that there will be setbacks,” said Aung Naing Oo, a former activist and now development specialist who returned to Burma from exile in Thailand for the first time in 20 years.

“There will always be obstacles to democratic change in the short-term, especially the danger of vote buying,” he told IPS.

While the NLD may win most of the seats it contests, it will be a minority party in the parliament. More than 70 percent of the parliamentary seats are already held by the pro-military legislators from the USDP, including many who are serving soldiers nominated by the army chief.

“Even if she is the leader of a minority party in parliament, Suu Kyi will be a potent symbol for national reconciliation and democratic change,” said Nyo Myint, a political analyst and pro-democracy activist based in Chiang Mai, Thailand. “The lady is showing her trust in the government,” he said.

(END)

While the general public here is anxious about the increasingly harsh sanctions imposed by Western powers on Iran’s financial and oil sectors, the leaders of the Islamic Republic appear more consumed by the upcoming parliamentary elections to be held Mar. 2.

This is despite the fact that these elections will not, in all likelihood, lead to much change in the current make-up of the Parliament, which is dominated by right side of the political spectrum and solid supporters the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Various leaders of the Islamic Republic are nevertheless expressing seemingly contradictory worries about election results being challenged, as they were in the 2009 presidential elections, and low turnout.

The first expression of these concerns came from Khamenei himself in a speech in Kermanshah Province in October. In a clear reference to post-election protests in 2009, he identified two primary issues. The first, he said, is “people’s presence, which must be broad and extensive. The second issue is remaining loyal to laws and respect for the people’s vote. It should not be so that if elections turned out the way we want… we accept it; and if the outcome goes against our views, we undermine the law.”

Concerns about post-election protests have also been expressed by Iran’s military leaders. In early January, the commander of Islamic Revolution’s Guard Corps (IRGC), Mohammad-ali Jafari, said, “Enemies intend to revive the sedition current in the wake of the elections for the Ninth Parliament through mayhem and artificial resuscitation and they prepared some plans.” To neutralize these plans, Jafari called for “maximal participation” of the people in the election.

Even the former presidential candidate and IRGC commander, Mohsen Rezaie, said on Feb. 16 that high participation is important for Iran’s “security and prestige”. “Enemies are waiting to increase sanctions and put Iran under pressure in the event of low turnout,” he went on to say.

The emphasis on high participation is a reflection of the reliance on elections as a source of legitimacy for the Islamic Republic. In 1993, when President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was re-elected, the 51- percent turnout was deemed a reflection of political apathy and became a source of concern.

The rise of reformist parties in the 1990s resolved the participation issue, increasing the turnout by double digits. But it also led to the presence of reformist candidates in both parliamentary and presidential elections who were seen as not sufficiently committed to the ideals of the Islamic Republic.

The post-2009 expulsion of these candidates from the political process and their branding as “seditionists” has renewed concerns about next month’s turnout, particularly in large cities such as Tehran, which is home to some 15 percent of the country’s electorate.

According to Mohammad-reza Bahonar, the conservative deputy speaker of parliament, a recent poll suggests that in Tehran, a mere 18 percent of the electorate plans to vote. It is perhaps for this reason that the judiciary has identified any calls for election boycott as a crime that will be punished.

But many analysts in Iran believe it will be unnecessary for reformist or opposition leaders to call for a boycott. The electorate, particularly in large cities, seems genuinely weary of electoral politics. The banning of major reformist parties, such as the Islamic Iran’s Participation Front and the Islamic Revolution Mojaheddin, and the imprisonment of their leaders have contributed heavily to this mood.

According to one university professor, the widespread feeling is one of people no longer wanting to become an “epic making nation”, in the words of the official propaganda that followed the 2009 presidential election, since they still believe that in the epic they made “their vote was counted for someone they did not vote for”.

Such a mood may lead the authorities to exaggerate the actual turnout next month. Already some hard-line dailies such as Kayhan are predicting a 65 percent or more turnout throughout the country, which would be quite high by historical standards, comparable only to the 1996 and 2000 parliamentary elections in which there was a real sense of competition among a wider selection of candidates.

In the last two parliamentary elections, from which many reformist candidates were excluded, the participation rate throughout the country was 51 percent in 2004 and 57 percent in 2008.

But a low turnout is only one aspect of the official concern. The increasingly acrimonious competition among various groups on the right of the political spectrum, known as Principlists, has also created the potential for election results to be challenged by candidates unhappy with any irregularities in that may take place.

The election season did not start this way. With no significant competition from reformists, representatives of various Principlist organisations vowed to work together to form unified lists of candidates throughout the country, and particularly in Tehran, which, with 30 seats, constitutes the most important district in the country, by far.

But this effort, which was led by Principlist stalwart and chairman of Council of Experts Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani, was unable to reach an agreement. The resulting splits have created two major groups: The United Principlist Front and the Steadfastness Front.

The former group is more of a coalition and includes candidates from both hard-line and more moderate and traditional wings of Principlism. It includes individuals who are close to Tehran’s mayor, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, as well as the current speaker, Ali Larijani, who is running as one the United Principlist Front’s candidates in the city of Qom.

The Steadfastness Front, on the other hand, consists mostly of hard- line followers of Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi, many of whom served in President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s cabinet. In fact, many observers believe that the Steadfastness Front does not identify itself with Ahmadinejad directly only because of the president’s association with his chief of staff, Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie, who has become persona non grata among Principlists due to his unorthodox and “deviationist” views.

Meanwhile, suspicions abound that Mashaie himself is organising a large number of candidates, and supporting them financially behind the scenes. A large meeting of “President’s Young Advisors” was just held in Tehran involving several thousand participants. But Mashie supporters have yet to release the list of their candidates, leaving their opponents in the dark.

Sadeq Zibakalam, a professor at the University of Tehran, suggested in an interview with the Iran Labor News Agency (ILNA) that such ambiguity is deliberate. “In order to avoid disqualification by the Guardian Council, the (Ahmadienjad) government will not reveal its support of candidates until the last days of the campaign,” he said.

He further believes that the Front’s plans to concentrate their efforts on the last days of the campaign will be particularly effective in smaller cities and rural areas where, according to the latest census data, about 29 percent of Iran’s population resides.

Added to the fear that Ahmadinejad and Mashaei supporters will do well owing to their access to the government’s financial resources is the reality that elections in Iran are conducted by the Interior Ministry. The Guardian Council, in its supervisory capacity, will try to act as a check to this government-controlled ministry. But the intense intra-Principlist competition is keeping the electoral process acrimonious and its results potentially open to challenge.

In the words of Abbas Abdi, a prominent journalist, the naked struggle over the spoils of the state, a common characteristic of most state-controlled oil-based economies, has effectively led to “a rather quick transition to outright political hostility and ugliness among former allies”.