Have the protesters overplayed their hand in Egypt?
I cannot help wonder about this — and my question is not based on any sort of value judgment whatsoever. But consider the basic chain of events:
Protests grow. The military does not really respond in crushing the opposition, which continues to grow. Hosni Mubarek announces he will not run for re-election. But he will serve out the remainder of his term
Victory for the protesters, right? If not a whole loaf, certainly more than half, though obviously what happens in elections would be the vital testing ground for democratic progress.
But the protesters are still not happy. And so protests continue, and the (inevitable?) backlash hits. An emotionally understandable stance, to be sure, and perhaps an ideologically understandable one as well.
But strategically and tactically? I’m just not sure. Because what I fear that we are seeing is a bell curve that might well end up with Mubarek maintaining power down the road, even after his promise to step down?
We have already seen the backlash, with the military and police and, more importantly, oft-shady Mubarek “supporters” becoming more active and violent. I can see a scenario playing out something like this: Protests continue, violence escalates, Mubarek and his supporters disavow violence that they can plausibly disavow, promise investigations, yet use that as an excuse to stay in power for the good of Egypt until “peace” is achieved. A state of low-intensity warfare and other economic and social disruption runs the serious risk of redounding to Mubarek’s benefit. And the regime reconstitutes itself.
I predicted a Tiananmen moment in the region, identifying Sudan as a likely possibility. But don’t rule out Egypt in all of this still far-from-completed story.
