The Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak has finally stepped down after holding on to his post ever since the beginning of the 18-day Philippine-people-power like struggle --a non-democratic system for a democratic cause-- that pushes to end his 30-year-rule.

After EDSA the world knew it is possible (after Ferdinand Marcos; it has ousted leaders of Romania, Georgia, Ukraine and South Africa just to name a few) but the Egyptian leader lacked the measures to preempt this kind of social uprising. Was it really inevitable or merely wanting in foresight? Sadly, this so-called modern day Pharaoh (Hosni Mubarak’s derogatory epithet) had no “Joseph the dreamer” by his side to foretell the future.

But now the more pressing problem the Egyptians are facing is what to do next. Who will rule Egypt after the president was removed? There seem to be no “Cory Aquino” around. Unlike the EDSA that was preceded by a snap election of which Cory Aquino was clearly defined as the imperative replacement president, the opposition of this huge nation seems not as prepared as it should have been, it looks like history has not set everything so well for them. Will the Mubarak-appointed vice president Omar Suleiman win the favor of his people and allow him to sit as the next Egyptian president or will he end-up like the seemingly Manila counterpart Arturo Tolentino?


On day one, at 9am, just as when few protesters tried to gather around a street that leads to Tahrir Square in Cairo, three military vehicles gathered to shield the protesters from police fire. During the revolution, the soldiers’ were being swarmed by the protesters without hostility leaves an enigmatic impression that asks whether the military is still or no longer in support of the government. Now that the military is in control, the question is: Was this a purely people power revolution or a military led undertaking?

Just as what a blogger said, the New York Times does not exactly interpret the news as a victory for democracy:

CAIRO — Egypt’s armed forces on Thursday announced that they had begun to take “necessary measures to protect the nation and support the legitimate demands of the people,” a step that suggested the military intends to take a commanding role in administrating the strife-torn nation.     There was no immediate confirmation that the army intended to replace the government named by President Hosni Mubarak, but protesters gathered in Tahrir Square appeared to welcome reports that the military had replaced the civilian government they have steadfastly opposed.     Television images on Al Jazeera showed the masses in Tahrir Square cheering the news, waving flags and chanting: “The Army and the people in one hand.”     Vice President Omar Suleiman, named by Mr. Mubarak to undertake a dialogue with opposition groups, had warned Tuesday night that if the process he was supervising did not produce results, the military would step in to take administrative control in what he called a “coup.” There was no information about what role Mr. Suleiman or Mr. Mubarak would play in a military government.

Knowing what took place behind before this political event had started, will define the kind of government Egypt’s “People Power Revolution” is victorious of.  For without, people sometimes have to wait for years if not decades in order to realize the fruit of their uprising, whether the military has a sincere intention of upholding democracy for its conclusion.