![]() |
Symbol of the Muslim Brotherhood |
While instating a new prime minister would ensure the SCAF has less power, the prime minister would then have the ability to form a new government. Plus, if the prime minister can only be chosen from a pool of Muslim Brotherhood members, is this real democracy? The Brotherhood had the clear upper hand in parliamentary elections because of previous experience in politics/elections and also had connections to the Egyptian people. Therefore the Brotherhood needs to recognize that it is not fair to the people to only be able to choose from the Brotherhood members.
Also, the thinking of the Brotherhood is not completely correct in their assertion that instating a new prime would automatically bring about more control and peace. Putting a person in a high powered position with large responsibility could lead to disaster if the person has little experience or undemocratic motives. While it may seem like a good idea, there are underlying factors that the Muslim Brotherhood needs to consider before appointing a new prime minister.
Although the Muslim Brotherhood does seek democracy, when they speak of appointing a member of their party, they "other-ise" the rest of the Egyptian population who isn't Muslim. While Egypt is a predominately Muslim country, they do have a large Christian population (as well as other religious sects). And with the recent clashes between Copts and Muslims, this idea is not one that will sit well with the Christians. Differences in religion will always separate Egyptians to some degree, but policies a predominately Muslim government will make will increase the differences between them. In this time of change, the last thing Egypt needs is further tension.
No comments:
Post a Comment