Democracy Lab Democracy Lab Democracy Lab Democracy Lab Democracy Lab Democracy Lab

Separated at Birth

Indonesia's transition to democracy can tell us a lot about the likely course of Egypt's revolution. There's good news and there's bad news.

BY JOHN T. SIDEL | FEBRUARY 15, 2012

Egypt faces grave concerns about its future. A deepening economic crisis, growing crime, and episodes of violence all offer grounds for anxiety. The ruling military junta, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), continues to rule in heavy-handed fashion, reasserting its extensive prerogatives in Egyptian politics and resisting demands for greater democracy. Recent elections produced a strong showing not only for the well-established Muslim Brotherhood but also for the more stridently puritanical, salafi Al-Nour Party, raising alarms about possible moves to expand the role of Islam in Egyptian society at the expense of liberal values and religious freedoms.

The fall of the Mubarak regime in early 2011 has inspired many observers to draw parallels with other "People Power" uprisings in places as diverse as Chile, Thailand, and the former Czechoslovakia.

But there's another case that just might offer a more instructive guide to where Egypt may now be headed. Indonesia in the years 1998-1999 offers a number of striking parallels. Both countries are regional giants. Indonesia's population of 240 million makes it the largest country in Southeast Asia, while Egypt, with its 80 million, is the biggest in the Arab world. Both countries are predominantly Muslim and boast long traditions of Islamic scholarship and social activism. But both are also home to important non-Muslim minorities (ethnic Chinese and Christians in Indonesia, Coptic Christians in Egypt) whose disproportionate influence in business and the professions has sometimes led to tensions.

In the 1950s and 1960s, both countries ended up with populist nationalist leaders (Sukarno in Indonesia, Nasser in Egypt) who championed "Third World" independence, economic nationalism, and socialism, engaging in conflicts with pro-Western neighbors, resisting U.S. "imperialism" and flirting with the Soviet Union and China. But by the late 1960s and early 1970s, popular nationalism in both countries met with defeat and disillusionment. The same years saw the rise of more conservative military rulers (Suharto in Indonesia, Sadat in Egypt) who moved to seek accommodation with their neighbors, embraced the United States, and opened their economies to flows of international finance, investment, and trade.

Both countries experienced three decades of authoritarian rule under a single military strongman: Indonesia under Suharto (1966-98) and Egypt under Mubarak (1981-2011). Both followed the economic guidelines of the "Washington Consensus," reducing dependence on external rents (e.g. oil revenues, Suez Canal transit fees) and moving from import-substitution industrialization to export-oriented manufacturing based on economic liberalization, privatization, and deregulation. In both cases these policies led to higher growth but also exacerbated social inequality, labor unrest, and struggles over land. The result was greater vulnerability to regional and global economic crises, as seen in Indonesia in 1997-98 and Egypt from 2008 onwards.

In both places, years of authoritarian rule under a single military strongman spawned centralized corruption, cronyism, and nepotism. Both presidents encouraged their children to establish themselves as major figures in the business world, thus spawning the diversified conglomerates of Suharto's sons and daughters and the vast empire of Mubarak's son Gamal. Over their final years in office, moreover, both leaders began to set the stage for dynastic succession in politics. Suharto's daughter Tutut and Mubarak's son Gamal rose to positions of increasing prominence within both regimes.

The final decade of military strongman rule fueled social and political change in both countries. Religious mores, demonstrated by growing conservatism in dress and behavior, increasingly asserted themselves. Islamic organizations began to assume more prominent positions in social and political life. In Indonesia this process began with the formation of the Indonesian Association of Islamic Intellectuals (ICMI) in 1991. In Egypt the Muslim Brotherhood increasingly asserted its presence in various professional associations and made a dramatic showing in 2005 parliamentary elections.

ROMEO GACAD/AFP/Getty Images

 

John T. Sidel is the Sir Patrick Gillam Professor of International and Comparative Politics at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

URGELT

12:34 AM ET

February 17, 2012

Yes, But...

A very cogent piece, well-reasoned.

I'd like to emphasize that there is one wild variable present with respect to Egypt that is not a factor (or, at most, a very insignificant factor) in the evolution of Indonesian politics: Israel. An Israel, in fact, in the hands of right-wing hardliners who are carrying out a policy of disenfranchised apartheid, economic strangulation and land seizures against the descendants of the former citizens of Palestine, who are - stating the obvious here - Muslim.

The nearby presence and activities of Israel, and the radicalized Palestinians and Iranian and Syrian proxies who oppose that presence and those activities, could be seen as a goad to the radicalization of Muslims in Egypt. Some radicalization has, in fact, happened in Egypt, but it was squashed by Mubarak, kept at a low simmer. Autarch though he was, Mubarak was committed to a secular state and was uninterested in untangling the 'problem' Israel poses for its Arab neighbors. With Mubarak out of the way, it's unclear if those policy positions will be sustained, or to what degree.

There are, however, signs of strain between the two countries that were not present when Mubarak ruled Egypt. We shall see how that develops.

I will refrain from predicting the development of an Egyptian theocratic state based on sharia law. In fact, I will refrain from making any predictions at all. I have no idea where Egypt is headed. But wherever that is, I'm pretty sure that Israel will be a large influence, and that's an influence that simply wasn't significant in Indonesia's political evolution since throwing off its own autarch.

Comparing the two nations might be a bit like comparing twin horses, very much alike in many respects, but only one of them has a huge burr under its saddle and is considerably irritated by it.

 

SHANDA HABERSHAM

10:28 PM ET

March 15, 2012

Egypt

In my opinion, Egypt goverment need to have new policies to control policies about economic, business and religious . This is the way for Egypt
to prevent the economy crisis, crimes, evil and violence.....I hope that in the future Egypt goverment will have right direction to develop to develop country and stablize the economy...