A conversation years ago with Desmond Stewart, a British writer known for his love and appreciation of Egypt and the Egyptian people, serves as the inspiration for this chapter. The author of such works as Cairo and The Friday Men (Heineman, 1961), Stewart had very definite views on the distinctive traits of the contemporary Egyptian personality. I recall that one of his most perceptive observations was that an enormous discrepancy has grown in the two decades of autocratic rule since 1952 between Egyptians' sense of rights, on the one hand, and their sense of duties, on the other.

Elsewhere in this book it is noted that the blame for Egypt’s present situation lies squarely with the government. This does not mean the responsibility of Egyptians, as individuals should be overlooked, particularly regarding duties and rights. Rather, there is a connection between the government's attitudes and performance level and those of the Egyptian citizen towards his rights and duties.

It should be stressed that it is as a result of the government's shoddy performance and its poor record that most Egyptians have become passive citizens who are unduly conscious of their rights and privileges—not least in the area of pensions—without developing a corresponding sense of obligation. A typical Egyptian citizen is greatly concerned with his right to public employment and its many benefits. Then comes his right to obtain housing, through the government if possible, followed by his right to a job abroad, preferably on secondment from the government, his right to go on pilgrimage to Mecca, to buy subsidized food and clothing, and so on through an endless list of state-supported privileges. Never will an Egyptian citizen display a sense of obligation similar to that of, say, his German counterpart, who is fully aware that to enjoy the privileges of citizenship he must first perform such basic duties as actively participating in his country's production process, protecting his environment and contributing towards solving society's problems by giving serious thought to their causes and their possible solutions.

The president recently spoke of the need for a "great awakening" in the life of all Egyptians. This is certainly true. Moreover, unless there is such an awakening, and soon, we are headed towards certain disaster. But the question is, what does the president mean by "awakening"? Does he mean the government should waken from the deep sleep into which it has been plunged for three decades of totalitarian rule, never guided by the lights of freedom and democracy? Or does he mean the awakening of the people to the duties and obligations incumbent on them, which they neglected for many years while claiming their right to the material advantages provided by the state, never attempting to expand the circle of rights to encompass political issues, such as the right to influence fateful decisions, the right to choose leaders freely or, at the very least, the right to live in a 20th century environment where roads and basic public services are concerned? Or did the president mean an awakening of both government and citizens?

We believe the call for a "great awakening" cannot become a reality unless it is directed first at the government and the administration and only then at the citizens of Egypt, to rouse them from a slumber so aptly described half a century ago by the poet who lamented:

• The great Pharaohs shuddered and recoiled, aghast

• To see such heritage go to waste.

• They saw a nation lag behind its age

• Which once had always had the lead.

• I almost hear the echo of their cry

• Across the centuries to be heard:

• Sons of Egypt! Hear our voice!

• Life or Death, that is the choice

• And nothing in between.

The awakening of the government will come about the day it acknowledges that the situation in Egypt has sunk to an all-time low, in all areas and at all levels, because of its own political and economic policies. The government must also admit that the time for stop-gap repairs is long gone, and that nothing short of a radical shift in those policies, as proposed in earlier chapters, can save Egypt.

At the same time the awakening of the Egyptian citizens requires a rekindling of the flame of positive nationalism in their hearts and minds which can transform them from being interested solely in rights and benefits to being mindful of their duties to society and to the nation. A citizen who accepts the state as a father figure, responsible for providing his children with education, employment and all their other needs is a negative citizen, even he was molded so by years of oppression which stripped him of his will and the spirit of endeavor.

There is no doubt that the transformation of Egyptians into “hirelings” of the regime, wholly dependent on it for their livelihood—and for all aspects of their life—was a deliberate policy of Egypt's rulers in the 1950s-60s, designed to help them consolidate their grip on power. In this way, they succeeded in suppressing all opposition; an entire people succumbed.

But there is more than one way to rekindle the spirit of nationalism and a sense of civic duty.

The first is by setting an example. When people see their leaders not practicing what they preach, they become alienated: their values are shaken and their sense of duty to society and to the nation recedes. The double standards to which the Egyptian people have for so long been exposed has quite understandably made them cynical and filled with bitterness. They need to see their rulers set an example, from the president down.

The second way is by eliciting the help of the mass media, but of media that are free, not that cater to the interests of specific persons or tendencies. Egyptians are bitterly resentful of the opportunism that has characterized our mass media for the past 30 years. The newspapers, radio and television have all, under a series of directors who were no more than lackeys of the totalitarian regime and the secret services, become what they are today: repetitive and dull.

The third way is through educational institutions, at both school and university levels, for these can infuse young learners with a true and effective nationalist spirit, based on love of country and a strong sense of civic duty, not a superficial love expressed in the rote chanting of sentimental anthems.

The fourth way is through mosque and church, where religious leaders should understand that their duty, apart from teaching the precepts of the faith, is not to preach hatred of others or incite extremist ideas but, rather, to instill a profound sense of duty to society and teach that work is sacred.      

Literature and the arts offer a fifth way to inspire a civic spirit. Literature is the conscience of the nation, and many a nation has risen from ruin thanks to great literature. Voltaire, Rousseau, Montesquieu and Diderot can proudly claim to have inspired public freedom and democracy in the West. Unfortunately, in Egypt 30 years of hypocrisy by a large number of kowtowing intellectuals and writers who turned a blind eye to all forms of oppression have caused our art and literature to lose their credibility among vast sectors of the Egyptian people.

Opposition groups too have an important role to play in this connection. But unless the opposition ceases to incite and insult, its ability to nurture a sense of civic duty in the people will remain very limited. The opposition will lose its credibility as seekers of reform and will be seen, instead, as aiming to settle personal scores or to reach powerful positions. Little has changed since Sa’ad Zaghlul described the opposition thus: "To them the insults, and to us the seats in parliament."

The Egyptian opposition, as a whole, is in dire need of objectivity and seriousness. That is particularly true of the Left which, more than other branches, needs to pause and reflect to ensure that it is not held accountable for the demagogical trend prevailing in many ranks of the political opposition in Egypt today.

President Mubarak's administration should make more effort to respond to the wishes of the opposition, especially since everyone admits that it (particularly the Wafd, Labor and Tagamu parties) is far more representative, at the popular level, than the number of seats it holds in the People's Assembly would indicate. The administration is surely aware that those parties have behind them more than 5% of Egyptian public opinion, and that at least half the country's intellectuals and educated people support them. Thus a positive response by the presidency to the opposition's demands would help generate a sense of civic duty on its part. There must be many issues on which Mubarak's administration could see eye to eye with the most cultured and enlightened groups of Egyptians, more than half of whom are represented by the three parties in question. Among such issues is the opposition's desire to amend the system of election to the People's Assembly, as well as its demand that the president should relinquish the chairmanship of his political party. The opposition also believes the regime should abstain from giving unconditional support to some of its public figures and that the head of state should be chosen through direct general elections rather than through a public referendum on a sole candidate nominated by the Assembly. The opposition would also like to see the administration, for example, abandon a sinking public sector in favor of privatization, forgo the destructive policy of subsidies and cease to apply an artificial rate of exchange.

It is worth mentioning that the reaction of the so-called “national” press to the president's call for a "great awakening" does not augur well for its chances of successfully drumming up enthusiasm for such a goal. The hypocritical reaction of the state’s eminent writers and editors may well have a negative impact on the citizens, who have long lost faith in the sycophantic national press.  

Moreover, the media have taken the president's call to mean the awakening of the citizens alone, whereas observers are unanimous in believing that the awakening should be, first and foremost, that of the government, since the present lethargy of the citizens is but a reaction to the failure of successive governments, a form of passive self-defense, as it were. Where are the eminent writers who insist that that there can be no great awakening if the president himself does not recognize the sorry state that Egypt has come to? Yet the government and all its men and institutions never publicly admit the dim situation, nor will they admit the grave errors and failed policies committed against the country over decades—in the economy, agriculture, education, the public sector, the military establishment, and on and on.

     Real confidence-building measures are required to win the public back, in all spheres. Without the growth and development of a sense of duty towards Egypt in the government and among its citizens, the "great awakening" which is necessary to pull Egypt out of its present slump will remain no more than a dream.