Though it has been over a week since Condoleezza Rice's visit to the Middle East, debates about her statements continue in the region, especially over her policy speech at the American University in Cairo (June 20th, 2005). Like any skillfully crafted, balanced speech, various constituencies selectively read parts of the speech to bolster their own political agenda. That selectivity revealed a sharp division among the three major political trends—Mubarak-style autocrats, the Islamist theocrats, and the emerging Kefiya (enough) democrats.
Among the most colorful descriptions of her performance was that offered by one of Egypt's most popular poets, Ahmed Foud Negm, a long-time critic of the Mubarak regime who has recently thrown his weight behind the emerging liberal opposition. Impressed by her willingness to take on the tough issues, Negm bestowed on her the title ‘Condoleezza the Lionhearted', for her challenge to Mubarak to go beyond his recent luke warm reforms. This may be the first time a political actor has appropriated the Lionhearted ascription since it was first used to describe King Richard of England. He won that title for bravery in confronting the equally heroic Muslim defender of the Holy Lands, Saladin, some ten centuries ago.
Condoleezza's admirers on this trip cut across the ideological spectrum, especially when she invoked her African-American heritage and spoke for the disadvantaged. This resonates well with Egyptians, who identify with their African roots and perceive themselves to be unfairly treated on the current world stage. One commentator alluded to her performance as reminiscent of the passionate Ethiopian princess, Aida, in Verdi's opera of the same name. Others noted her strong defense of women and the need for gender reforms in Saudi Arabia, and her repudiation of the incarceration of Saudi dissidents. She won additional points by engaging in self-criticism of her country and its 60-year history of a Middle East policy built on neglect of democracy in favor of stability. As a result, said Rice, neither were achieved.
She acknowledged Mubarak's role in "unlocking the door for change", then hastened to say bluntly that while this was necessary it is not enough. In order for Egypt to lead the way for democracy, as it has for Middle East peace, the world expects to see truly free and fair elections, lifting of emergency laws, and an opening of the state-controlled media.
To show how far the media will need to go to be truly objective, one only has to look at coverage of Dr. Rice's speech. Both official spokesmen and the Mubarak-controlled media highlighted her praise for Egypt's efforts in the peace process and her nod to Mubarak's ‘bold step' to initiate political reforms. They reminded Egyptians that these statements are in line with Laura Bush's comments made at the pyramids a month earlier about the wisdom of going slowly with reforms.
However, the same media totally ignored what Dr. Rice said next: if Egypt is to genuinely democratize, that will require a lifting of extra-judicial measures which currently impede free speech and peaceful assembly. Upcoming elections in Egypt will only be meaningful if the state-controlled media provide equal access to opposition presidential candidates. And she touched on another sore point for the regime, by calling for international observers of the two upcoming elections—for president in September and parliament in November.
The place where Dr. Rice disappointed democracy advocates was her silence regarding the ban preventing political participation by Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. The national media hailed Dr. Rice's refusal to engage the Muslim Brotherhood in a dialogue, touting this as a vindication of Mubarak's longstanding refusal to allow any Islamist groups into the political space.
Understandably, the Muslim Brothers did not take kindly to this position. Lamenting the fact that Dr. Rice, like other Western politicians, is falling victim to Mubarak's scare tactics, their spokesman pointed out that she ignores the evolution of the Brotherhood in Egypt over the past quarter of a century. He reminded readers of frequent public assertions of respect for human rights, rights of women and non-Muslims, and their commitment to democracy as stated by their leader in March, 2004.
Muslim Brothers also asked why she did not recognize the important lesson to be drawn from the trajectory of Islamist politicians in Turkey, Morocco, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and elsewhere. In these countries the Islamists have meticulously observed the rules of the democratic game when they were elected to power.
Despite these reservations, rarely has an American official been able to draw as much praise from contrasting political camps as Rice did in this last visit. It is testimony to how clarity of vision can go a long way, despite differences. In this respect, Condoleezza Rice repaired much of the damage caused by recent crossed signals from the Bush administration. Let us hope that this positive impact will be sustained by forceful follow-up. If we accept Negm's analogy, likening her to Richard the Lionhearted, the question becomes: where is the modern-day equivalent of someone with the insight and stature of Saladin?