Fresh Fear In Egypt.

Over the past few days, fresh violence has erupted in the Egypt capital of Cairo, amidst growing concern for the stability of the country and the surrounding regions.

Tahrir Square, quickly becoming dubbed Terror Square, once again has been the centre of an occupation movement from many thousands of the capital’s citizens, in the longest demonstration campaign since the February revolutions that caused waves across the continent.

At first, the scale of the violence was not appreciated, with the claims of two deaths on Saturday also being widely disregarded. However, this first inclination to ignore the problems of a nation led to the dramatic uprising some nine months ago: this has to be one of the fastest repeats of history known in modern times.

By Monday morning, morgues had confirmed over 30 deaths, whilst number amassing to almost 2,000 were reported as casualties.

TV reports have shown the widespread use of tear gas, aggression, and make shift weapons from wood and other loose materials, including concrete. More importantly than the February demonstrations, other prominent Egyptian cities are now taking up arms in the protest, with action reported in Alexandria, Suez and Aswan.

The unrest has risen from the continued presence of the military as the official power keepers of the country. When first introduced as the interim preservers of peace in the winter months, they promised elections would be held in September, but notoriously these have been delayed.

Although elections are now due to start next week, the action already spreads a sombre tone over what was supposed to be a joyous moment for the Egyptian people to vote for the first time after three decades of autocratic rule under Mr Mubarak. Since the Egyptian people served their own warning notice of resolution to the government and army back in February, taking to the streets despite the widespread attempts from officials to uphold the then current system, it seems rather foolish of the current army officials to have taken the situation so likely.

Propositions to delay elections till the end of 2012 have however only serve to paint the current officials in the most dictatorial light.

Moreover, it provides an ample opportunity for any successor and their government to highlight the need for stronger control, resulting in a complete turn back to a tyrannical or oppressive parliament.

Undoubtedly, the fresh waves of violence and deaths will ultimately stain the transition to democracy and highlight the need for a civilian administration: the worry is that the violence could grow into a mob and the revolution play out in a much similar way to the struggle seen in close Northern territory, Libya. However, will the West sit back and have an ambivialent role before they step in again?

Just as happened at the beginning of the protests against Hosni Mubarak's rule earlier this year, it was the deaths above all that really brought the people out on the streets. Perhaps this totalitarian nightmare is an Egyptian curse not quite yet broken…

Fairer Votes? Just Give Us A Fairer Government!

Elections on the 5^th May have generated a great deal of interest as they rightly should. Last year’s national election saw a hung parliament and  a consequent coalition has emerged: that twelve months later it has a united front is evidence of the dedication and commitment each party has made to compensate, compromise and collaborate with each other. Coalitions are indeed often considered weak and ineffective, but this government has so far tackled huge issues (which undoubtedly leave a lot of room for problems and grumbling) concerning education costs and public sector reforms. 

Now the promise of a referendum is delivered. Never in recent centuries has there been such a crucial opportunity to change our system of enfranchisement. As ever, every voter counts. Not only do recent polls demonstrate that opinion is spilt, swinging back and forth on the issues, but with fewer people actively interested in politics at large, this event has created an air of suspense between many. 

65.1% turned out in the elections of 2010 and this was considered a great achievement considering the previous election had only received 61.4% and prior to that 59.4%. However, we should consider that only as far back as 1997, there was a 71.4% turnout – and that was the lowest recorded figure in the post-World War Two era. No doubts can be held that there has been a significant drop in the number of voters – and yet there is greater concern about the way in which our government passes law. In this case, the first method by which to attain a fairer government appears fundamental: vote. With more than a third of the nation not helping to gage true feeling and beliefs, there is not the room for government to be considerate.

Yet, we may question the reasons behind the sudden drop. In a politically correct era, politics has become increasingly filled with jargon and specialist lexicon that prevent access and appreciation for the system. Moreover, with greater media outlets than ever before, parties have simply not campaigned as widely as they possibly could. People’s interests lie in so many different areas today that a government, especially one riddled with cynicism from any onlooker, needs to adapt to circumstance and target groups all through the term – not just at election time. There need be change effected for good, not for votes. Therefore, government need be more clear and defined and pro-active; so make them work for this.

Of course, the previous ideas of making politicians work all throughout their time in parliament sounds quite novel to many sceptics. However, the image serves to highlight how far politics has become a game. We only become actively involved as a society when elections are taking place. Whereas in decades gone by, social reforms, political movements and technological advances ensured politicians were seen every day to make comment and move people to belief, today politicians appear more competitive for votes each April alone and do not add much to their public sphere over the intervening year.

Some of this point scoring politics can be seen quite clearly in the current AV campaigns. For example the ‘No to AV’ programme points out costs that appear quite negligible in the long-term. It suggests millions will be spent on AV in explaining how it works – this should be common knowledge for us to make an informed decision BEFORE voting, not after it could become implemented policy. Also, discrediting the scheme through costs on new machines is hardly an acceptable argument – such machines would be useful under EITHER system of politics. However, more than these, the suggestion that there is excessive cost at having this referendum is rather insulting: democracy should be upheld at all costs; voices should not be ignored because of the ‘price’ of political freedom.

This is not to say that the ‘Yes’ voters have fared much better in their attempts at an independent campaign. It suggests that the AV system provides a bigger say in who comes first and last, and yet this phrase does not reflect the complexity of the vote count. In introducing this vote, there was a pledge it would help tackle what is commonly referred to as ‘seats for life’, but it will leave more than 200 seats unchanged. And surely the every vote counts argument is not unique to AV?

Increasingly, there appears cause for despair. Whilst politicians tackle each other with out of context quotes and front page jibes, the general public are left more unaware of the political ties. Although we have an impression of which party prefers whatever course of action relevant to a particular issue, there is little concrete argument as to why this conclusion has been reached: for both sides refer again and again to similar points.

In short, government is in need of reform and it is only achievable through the collaborative voices of the electorate ourselves. In seeking change, we seek politics to affect our daily lives for the better, for politics in action. No longer should these leaders of nations mock each other’s aims and sit passively by for a large proportion of the year. If only we exercise our own liberties, we could achieve such a more functioning government in many ways. No fully functioning government is given to us on a plate.

For more detailed insights to the flaws of the AV campaign, visit: http://thedolphinsblowhole.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/the-straw-man-referendum-how-the-av-debate-misses-the-point/