Endless meetings and discussions were held on satellite channels between those who are in favor of the coalition and those warning against it. And the peak of this melodramatic scene was the ostentatious claim that the coalition has reached a majority of 400 deputies that will control parliament, as was planned by certain state institutions.
Suddenly, the coalition collapsed when the Wafd Party and the Homeland Future Party withdrew from it due to the undemocratic and unilateral practices of its leader.
Talk show host Ibrahim Eissa said the coalition reminds us of past experiences with totalitarian parties, like the Socialist Union and the National Democratic Party. He warned of the consequences of security forces intervening in political life, as they did by supporting the For the Love of Egypt list during parliamentary elections, while talk show host Ahmed Moussa warned that the coalition may collapse.
This is a difference of affiliation as opposed to a difference of opinion. It tells us who the satellite programs affiliate with and for whom they work.
Away from claims of patriotism, the question that arises here is: can an entity formed by state institutions be democratic?
Democracy means leaving interactions to take place naturally between political forces and parties.
Such an entity is in fact killing the democratic process by forming a bloc within parliament that allows the executive branch to control it with its security services under the pretext of protecting Egypt.
If we are seeking a true democracy, we should leave political life to take its course without interference so that parliament really expresses the interests of the people. Decisions in parliament should be left for a true and not a fabricated majority to take.
This parliament was orchestrated by laws that have fragmented it, and the state is now trying to combine those fragments into a coalition loyal to it.
_______________________________
Edited translation from Al-Masry Al-Youm – http://www.egyptindependent.com//opinion/protecting-egypt