By Kyle Almond, CNN

Two high-profile elections came to a head this past weekend, with voters in France and Greece taking their countries in a new direction.

But there’s still much more to watch for in 2012, a year in which nearly a third of the world’s countries are casting ballots.

FULL POST

Editor's note: Isobel Coleman is the author of "Paradise Beneath Her Feet" and a senior fellow for U.S. foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

By Isobel Coleman - Special to CNN

Egypt's presidential race has been a political roller coaster. After banning 10 candidates earlier this month, the country's election commission banned and unbanned this week yet another well-known candidate, former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq, although the constitutional court is still reviewing that decision. The remaining front-runners for president speak a similar language on the need for economic reform and political transition, but they hold very different positions on the role of Islam in a new Egypt.

In this sense, the presidential election will be an important indicator of how much weight Egyptians give to Islam as a factor in their political life. It will not be the only factor in their decision, which will no doubt turn on questions of personality and name recognition as much as anything. But a vote for a candidate with more conservative Islamist leanings - and there is evidence of strong support for such candidates - will likely influence the writing of the constitution, with potential for a long-lasting impact on the rights of minorities and women in particular.

Read on here.

By Fareed Zakaria, CNN

Egypt is in the news these days because of the nomination of two new candidates for president - one from the Muslim Brotherhood, Khairat al-Shater, and the other from the more radical Salafi movement, Hazem Salah Abu Ismail.

Many Egypt watchers are understandably concerned. There have been attacks on Christians, Western aid workers and women. So where is Egypt headed? Is democracy in Egypt being captured by highly illiberal forces? Can tolerance and pluralism win out?

We should continue to monitor the situation very closely, but as of right now, we should not panic.  Al-Shater and Abu Ismail both insist that they are fully committed to democracy and to the rights of minorities.

Yes, they have very reactionary social views, but such views are allowed within democratic systems. There are plenty of parties in the West with arguably reactionary or illiberal views. Nevertheless, these parties run and, in some places, win elections. For example, ultra-right-wing, nationalist parties have won elections in countries across northern Europe. FULL POST

Editor's Note: Shibley Telhami is Anwar Sadat professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland and Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Saban Center of the Brookings Institution.

By Shibley Telhami - Special to CNN

In a surprising move, Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood decided to field it's own candidate, Khairat Al-Shater, for the Presidency of Egypt, after months of insisting that it would not do so. Immediately, questions were raised about its credibility not only among its opponents but also among some of its supporters, many of whom opposed the move.

What explains this sudden reversal by a group that has been very calculating and careful in its political actions since the fall of Hosni Mubarak? The answer is: It found itself out-maneuvered by both the ruling Military Council and the surprisingly strong and more conservative Islamist competitors, the Salafis. And it stood to risk losing much of its gains. FULL POST

Editor’s Note: Ambassador Nabil Fahmy is the founding Dean of the School of Public Affairs at the American University in Cairo. He served as Ambassador of Egypt to the United States from 1999-2008.

By Nabil Fahmy - Special to CNN

Last year, Egyptians poured into the streets determined to seize a role in governing their future. Their primary goal was to change the constitution in order to ensure free, fair and competitive elections for president toward the end of the year.

The result eighteen days later was far beyond popular expectations. The head of state, head of government and head of parliament were all removed from office.

These results were inspirational. There was a sense of euphoria throughout Egypt. Egypt had achieved its awakening.

There was, however, no clear leader or leadership structure to this uprising. Without a natural leader for the population to coalesce around, it was clear that managing the post-revolutionary phase would be complicated. FULL POST

Editor's Note: Dr. James M. Lindsay is a Senior Vice President at the Council on Foreign Relations and co-author of America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy. Visit his blog here and follow him on Twitter.

By James M. Lindsay, CFR.org

The six Americans charged with violating Egypt’s civil-society laws finally got to come home. The National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute posted more than $4 million in bail to get the travel ban that the Egyptian government had on their employees lifted. (Germany’s Konrad Adenauer Foundation posted another half a million dollars in bail to get its two employees out of Egypt.) The accused all pledged that they will return to Egypt in April when their trial on charges of failing to register their NGO with the Egyptian government and taking money from a foreign entity is scheduled to resume. Fat chance that happens. FULL POST

By Fareed Zakaria, CNN

The video above shows a strange cartoon from Egypt. It's of Uncle Sam looking sinister and mean, hunched over a door with a keyhole. The implication, I suppose, is that the U.S. is spying on Egyptians. Another cartoon shows him with a pistol and he's pointing it at an Egyptian man with a cannon. The caption in Arabic says "dignity". The point here is quite clear: Americans are robbing Egyptians of their dignity.

What in the world?

These cartoons were published recently in a state-run newspaper and they highlight a disturbing trend: Egypt's transitional government is trying to whip up anti-American fervor.

Its latest ploy is a high-publicity trial. Forty-three people, nearly half of them U.S. citizens, stand accused of illegally receiving foreign funds to promote democracy. The government claims they didn't have a license to do their work but in reality these people had filed their registration papers under the old regime of Hosni Mubarak. They were told their papers were in order.

It's a little rich for the Egyptian government - which receives $1.2 billion from the United States every year - to harass charities for getting funds from America. So what's going on?

FULL POST

Editor's Note: Gabriel Kohan is a former Israel Government Fellow and Mark Donig is a former Dean’s Fellow at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya’s Program for the Diplomatic Corps. The authors can be followed on Twitter at @TheMidEastBeast.

By Gabriel Kohan and Mark Donig - Special to CNN

In 1967, after the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) in the Sinai Peninsula abandoned its position as Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser postured toward armed conflict with Israel, then-Israeli Ambassador to the U.N., Abba Eban, compared UNEF to “an umbrella that is taken away as soon as it begins to rain.” The international community, rather than use its leverage, willingly cowed to Egypt, and war soon followed.

Today, Eban’s sentiments could be aptly applied to America’s reticence to use its own leverage over Egypt. Just over a year after President Mubarak’s ouster, U.S.-Egyptian relations are in crisis as 19 American NGO workers face trial in Egypt for their work to promote democracy. And yet, American aid still flows to Egypt unabated as Cairo continues to undermine U.S. interests. FULL POST

Editor's Note: Will Marshall is the president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute. Marshall serves on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy. 

By Will Marshall - Special to CNN

With deadly soccer riots, popular unrest and a tricky political transition to manage, you’d think that Egypt’s military rulers would have enough on their hands without provoking a confrontation with the United States. Evidently not.

Everyone knows the generals call the shots in Egypt, but they profess to be powerless to stop Egypt’s courts for trying 19 Americans on trumped up charges of funneling “foreign funding” to anti-government protestors. This outrage demands a calm but resolute response from President Obama. While avoiding public statements that further inflame Egyptian nationalism, Obama should quietly make it clear to the Supreme Military Council that persisting in this folly will lead to a cut-off of U.S. aid. FULL POST