Doctor Mohamed El-Baradei spent about a week in Egypt, after returning to it after a long period of absence, and before leaving it for a round-trip that will last about a month, returning to it once again at the end of this month. During that week, the man exerted tremendous effort to meet the demands of satellite television programs and newspapers, in order to hold interviews about his plans for the future and the reasons for which he has complied with the demands of part of the Egyptian elite, putting himself forth as candidate for the coming presidential elections, as well as how the conditions he has laid down would be met in order to enable him or other independents to become candidates in the presidential elections. The media has in general played an important role in the issue of Baradei, and competition has taken place between newspapers and television shows to hold interviews with him and cover his activity. With the exception of “nationalist” newspapers and state television, not one daily talk show was devoid of talk about Baradei and his plans, knowing that Baradei did not take the initiative during his stay in Vienna of announcing his intention to run as candidate for the presidency or to join those who demand a change or an amendment to the constitution. Rather, he determined his stance on the demands, articles and views of some political activists who had found in him a figure fit for candidacy. There is now in Egypt a race to amend the constitution between two camps: the first is now led by Baradei who ended up forming a committee to work on drafting a new constitution; the second one comprises four political parties, namely: the New Wafd Party, the left-wing National Progressive Unionist Party (Tagammu), the Arab Democratic Nasserist Party and the Democratic Front Party. These parties had previously announced their alliance, which aims at achieving political security in confronting the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP). The latter, on the other hand, is quite certainly monitoring the activity and every move of both camps, and, despite the reservation voiced by major party figures, what was understood of them certifies that the constitution will not be amended before the parliamentary elections scheduled before the end of this year, nor before the presidential elections scheduled in the fall of next year. Surrounded by all these political waves, ordinary citizens continue to follow the news of Baradei and his activity, as well as the efforts of those gathered around him. Ordinary citizens have for years been watching party leaders on satellite television also talk about political reform. They are always and to a much greater extent busy all day providing for their daily needs, and at night they sit and watch those who talk about amending the constitution. Those who call for reform and for amending the constitution, whether party leaders or Baradei and his supporters, consider that the political situation remaining as it is without any changes is the reason leading to the ongoing suffering of citizens, and that social and economic change – and therefore “life” change for people – will not be achieved without political change. Meanwhile, some believe that politics has become a luxury, that citizens' preoccupation with their daily concerns does not afford them the opportunity to dabble in politics, and that facing the circumstances of life takes priority over facing the regime or gathering around any faction of the opposition. Between the two camps, major NDP figures promote the idea that social reform is in fact taking place, even if slowly, and that the activity of some opposition forces hinders reform instead of driving it forward. How is constitutional change achieved? The answer of Baradei's camp is that popular pressures will in the end lead to the amendment when the ruling regime becomes forced to comply with the people's demands. As for opposition parties, they consider that the alliance between them represents a means of pressure on the ruling party, that not joining Baradei's campaign is to their credit, and that they as part of the system seek to change it from within, asserting that the constitutional amendment which took place in 2005 – making the selection of the President of the Republic take place through elections instead of the system of referendum that was in practice – was the result of the opposition's efforts over more than twenty-five years. On the whole, there does not seem be any signs of an agreement between the active parties on the issue of political reform and amending the constitution in Egypt. Rather, it is quite clear that each party is in a different world, as the ruling party is moving forward on the path it normally walks, the opposition does not want to break its truce with the regime, and Baradei and his supporters are going by the saying “a storm begins with a single drop”. Meanwhile, citizens watch and do not seem interested, despite the fact that all parties swear that they only seek the people's best interest!
