Just
when the pace of events in Egypt appears to be slowing down, it speeds up
again. It’s been four days since the second round of the presidential election but the outcome has
not been officially announced and it’s already fading into the distant
past. As things stand it appears
that Muhammad Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and
Justice party, won the election with 52 percent of the votes cast. The official results have not yet been
announced by the Presidential Election Commission and there is concern about
what its announcement will be.
Some wags have predicted that it will announce that former Prime
Minister and Air Force General Ahmad Shafiq won with 90 percent of the vote.
The
Muslim Brothers, among others, have published figures based on the vote tallies
at the governorate and district level where they were allowed to see the
results. So has the Ahram
newspaper which I have used for writing this entry. The Carter Center has
voiced reservations about the political context within which the election
occurred but less so about its mechanics:
“These provisions helped to instil
confidence in the final results by ensuring that agents had verifiable
information regarding electoral results in their jurisdictions. In addition,
Carter Center witnesses reported improved access to District General
Committees, although domestic witnesses continued to face obstacles to
meaningful observation there. However, given the fact that there is no
outside access to the final aggregation of results, it is essential that the
PEC publish vote results broken down to the polling station level at the
earliest possible instance on their website. In meetings with The Carter
Center, the PEC has committed to do so within one week of the election.”
Without
more, lower-level results than we have and adequate complementary demographic
statistics it is no more possible to understand what the presidential vote
means than it was with the parliamentary vote. We can guess about the transition from the first to the
second round with some level of confidence. Generally speaking it seems
plausible that Shafiq picked up Amr Moussa’s voters from the first round and
that Morsi picked up some combination of votes from Abu al-Futouh and Hamdeen
Sabbahi. About 10 % more people
voted in the run-off than in the first round but Morsi could not have picked up
both Abu al-Futouh’s voters and Sabbahi’s or he would have won more decisively
than he seems to have.
For the moment the best I can think
of to do is to look at briefly at some of the districts where Shafiq and Morsi
won and compare those to the inaccurate impressions one has of the
districts. There were some
surprises. Without time to make an
adequate assessment of instant and popular analyses, my sense is that most
people think that, in general, Christians, the well-off, touristic areas, and
those who live in particular
strongholds of the old regime voted for Shafiq whereas the lower middle class,
the poor, and the devout Muslims voted for Mursi. This is itself
a reflection of a set of images long beloved in Egypt (and elsewhere) about the
relationship of class to nationalism refracted through voting patterns. The poor and the working class are most
committed to revolution and patriotism the argument goes. Unfortunately as generations of
communists and nationalists painfully discovered, it ain’t necessarily so.
Shafiq
won a majority of the votes in Cairo (the city is the governorate) or 1.89
million out of 3.4 million cast.
As might be expected he did well in Shubra, Madinat Nasr, Ain Shams, and
the silk-stocking neighborhood of Qasr al-Nil. More surprisingly he also strongly carried the poorer
neighborhoods of Darb al-Ahmar, El-Zawiya el-Hamra, and Sayyida Zainab. El-Zawiya Al-Hamra returned parliamentary representatives
from the MB as did much of the rest of Cairo. So Shafiq’s victory in these districts is indicative of some
change. Economic distress is one
possibility but another is that other patterns of religious mobilization among
the Muslim population are beginning to occur which could include both Sufi
orders or simply political choices reflecting a stronger orientation to the
world of the Azhar (which did not institutionally support a candidate).
Morsi
did exceptionally well in the province of Fayoum with 593,000 votes out of
762,000 cast (just a note: I’ve rounded all the numbers to the nearest
thousand). Shafiq, on the the
other hand, did exceptionally well in Minufia where he gained 947,000 out of
1.32 million votes cast. Those who
savor the irony of fate (a popular Egyptian Facebook meme these days) might
notice that the only district in Minufia Morsi won was “Sadat.” This outcome may be due to some
character of the province (or what we might account for in the language of
heavier statistical artillery, fixed effects). It would be easy to make up a story about Minufia as a
conservative bulwark of old regime remnants or benighted peasants in which case
I suppose Fayoum would be where the revolutionary (or at least Islamist but
less plausibly more Muslim) peasants live. More likely there may be significant sociological or
economic differences between these two areas that would be worth
investigation. What is clear is
that rurality alone doesn’t seem to explain much.
Other
provinces suggest a very different kind of story, more like that of Cairo. In Giza the two candidates split the
vote, but Shafiq won Imbaba the lower-class district where religious violence
flared in May 2011 and which had been an “Islamic emirate” in the 1990s. The more upscale areas of Doqqi and
Agouza went for Shafiq while in the more rural districts of Kerdasa and Hawamdieh
Mursi won heavily. Atfih, another
site of violence against Christians, voted very strongly for Mursi. In Alexandria, Amiriyah’s two districts
overwhelmingly supported Morsi which could suggest either that inter-religious
strife plays a mobilizing role for electoral politics in Egypt or that areas
with a tendency for high levels of Islamist organization are also more likely
to experience religious conflict.
Or, if taken in concert with the results of Imbaba, it may suggest that
there are some important differences in religious conflict and its impact on
various areas. The conflict in
Imbaba may have appeared to local residents to have had its roots in outside
issues. It developed out of a
claim by a Muslim man not originally from the area that a church was holding
his wife, who converted from Christianity, a virtual prisoner. In Atfih and Amiriyah the conflicts
appear to have originally been rooted in local antagonisms including property
disputes.
Shafiq
did exceptionally well in the areas in and around the cities of Mansourah and
Mit Ghamr in Daqahliyah, but the most surprising results appear to be in
Gharbiya province. Shafiq crushed
Mursi in and around Tanta as well as in and around the famed working-class
textile center of Mahallah al-Kubra and in Kafr al-Zayyat. It is impossible to say how well Shafiq
did with working-class voters but he clearly did very well in urban areas
historically associated with strikes, Egypt’s left, and the industrial working
class. Comparisons with
earlier elections this year cannot be very meaningful because the voting
districts differ across elections.
For example, Gharbiya had two districts for the proportional
representation contests for the parliament whereas the presidential results are
reported on the basis the regular administrative divisions of the
province. It is nevertheless worth
noting that Mursi received fewer votes than the combined total of the FJP and
Salafi parties (totals are reported for both Nour and Construction and
Development) which together received more than 50 percent of the province’s
vote. Together these parties
received more than 650,000 votes in the parliamentary election in Gharbiya but
Morsi was credited with 583,000 votes in the presidential contest. The provisional
(but complete) returns for the presidential election in the province reported
by Al-Ahram give Shafiq 993,000 votes out of 1.58 million cast. These are clearly much larger than the
totals for the Wafd and Election Bloc which won seats with something like
100,000 votes across the two districts that made up the province.
This story was somewhat lightly
repeated in one other area with similar associations, Shubra al-Khayma in
Qalyubiya province on the northern outskirts of Cairo. The equally strong textile center and
old leftist stronghold of Kafr al-Dawar, on the other hand, gave 71,000 votes
out of 106,000 to Mursi and the markaz Kafr al-Dawar also voted heavily for
Mursi (103,000 votes out of 145,000 cast).
Much
of the meaning of the vote remains hidden from our view given the paucity of
information. But it is, I
think, apparent that the Egyptian electorate continues to change as it is
presented with different challenges rather than being a monolithic bloc as may
have appeared during the March 2011 referendum. It also suggests that the use of the term “felool”
(“remnants” of the old regime) will remain a powerful political tool. But it may not be a good idea to base
analysis of Egypt’s ongoing politics on the idea that the electoral base of
politicians such as Shafiq, obviously himself a remnant of the old regime, is
itself a stable, uniform, and minor feature of Egyptian political life.
1 comment:
Pharo Cleaning provides office cleaning, commercial cleaning, along with drive way cleaning in Sydney. It is the best carpet cleaning Sydney and lawn mowers Sydney provider.
Thanks,
Commercial Cleaning
Post a Comment