Letter from Tahrir Square

Ben Ali and Mubarak, the brought down dictators in Tunisia and Egypt, were in the same situation. Both had legitimacy and were internationally recognized. According to the applicable law at that time, they had the power. They never wanted to admit that they didn’t have enough authority to run the country. They had to learn that progressively during the uprisings. If you look at their speeches when people went to the street, you will see that there were three moments. At a first time they gave order to people to go home, saying that they will not admit any disorder. At a second time they started to make concessions saying that there are foreign forces manipulating the crowd and they promise to make reforms in the perspective of more democracy and more freedom. But it was not enough because they were still talking in the name of the power they had not in the name of any real authority. It was difficult for them to admit, that the people who had the authority of the street regained the power. When they pushed the two presidents to step down people showed that their authority was stronger than the official power and they are the ones who decide. Hence the third moment when the two presidents say that they finally understand the people’s will and they literally leave the power.

What is happening with the new islamist transitional government in Egypt, is again the same confusion between institutional power and moral and effective authority. For President Morsi, the legitimacy he got through the democratic process makes that he wants full power. He doesn’t understand that he still doesn’t have enough authority. He thinks that the strength he is given from the legitimacy allows him to legitimately use force against the people. But there are two kinds of power. The one relies on means of repression and violence of the State to grant the institutional legitimacy; the other has a moral legitimacy which can be translated in a real and effective authority and hence a stable governance. The first can be seen in the behavior of the police officers hiding behind their uniforms, the latter is incarnated by the committees coordinating the security of the crowd without any ‘official legitimacy’, except the one of the street.

In Egypt, but also in Tunisia, people developed a high adverse sentiment against all kinds of confusion between Power and Authority. The best example of this confusion is the declaration of the martial law in some regions of the two countries as last resort to control a rebel population.  Governments think that the legitimacy they got thanks to democratic process bringing them to power, gives them automatically an absolute tutorship and authority on the people. In fact they got the power as a set of institutions, and the uprising of the people means that they still don’t have enough moral authority. They can conquer the power following the rules of democracy, but to really govern, they need to deserve the authority.

At this moment of transition, the people obviously don’t have enough trust in the still young and yet very arrogant government.  People will not admit any agenda neither any policy as far as the politics are not able to make a distinction between the power of the State and the effective political authority, and that even when they have the first one, this doesn’t mean that they automatically have the second. They should learn not to shout in face of those who brought them to the power. They should learn how to listen to people instead of only give orders so that they settle down and stay in line. The little stories I witnessed show that a uniform doesn’t make you a police agent of order. It gives you the official status but it doesn’t enable you automatically to maintain it.   

People have authority and can decide when the politicians can run the State and get the power and when they have to leave it and give it back. The one who will acknowledge and respect this will be able to really govern with peace and effectiveness.

Full story : http://www.eutopiainstitute.org/