Cairo ? If Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wants to promote democracy on her visit to the Egyptian capital, she should visit the Judges’ Club.

This handsome, white stone building in downtown Cairo, with elegant chandeliers and marble pillars and floors, was founded in 1932 as a place for Egyptian judges to enjoy open debate. They have continued to do so in its halls despite limits placed on judicial independence by a series of strongman rulers.

But something astonishing happened at the club on May 13. Thousands of judges from all over the country – all establishment pillars – flooded into Cairo for the largest-ever meeting of jurists. The crowd was so huge that brightly colored tents and plastic chairs had to be set up in the surrounding streets.

What happened next might be the most important step yet in Egypt’s very hesitant moves toward greater political openness. The judges pledged to refuse to supervise Egypt’s first contested presidential election in September – such supervision being required by the constitution – unless the regime stopped interfering with their independence.

The judges were outraged that the terms of the new constitutional amendment that permits Egypt’s first contested presidential election will actually prevent them from monitoring the voting freely. They believe that violates the constitution and guarantees manipulation of the ballots. “If we had an independent judiciary and fair elections,” Judge Hesham El-Bastawi told me, “everything would change.”

So why should Rice visit the Judges’ Club?

Because there is huge confusion in Egypt about whether the Bush administration’s promotion of Arab democracy is sincere.

From government officials to liberal opposition activists to the unemployed in the slums of Imbaba, nearly every Egyptian I spoke with questioned Bush’s motives. Most seem to believe that his real goal is to distract attention from America’s troubles in Iraq.

But opposition activists also believe that U.S. pressure prompted President Hosni Mubarak to consider a contested election, and that only U.S. pressure got opposition activists such as Ayman Nour released from prison and prevented many more from being jailed.

The question in activists’ minds is how far the United States is willing to pursue democracy promotion. Mubarak is an important U.S. ally in the sputtering Israeli-Palestinian peace process and has conducted a harsh campaign that put down a threat by violent Islamists. Will Bush really promote a political opening that could produce a less friendly government?

Some of the leading organizers of the umbrella movement Kifaya make no secrets of their hostility to U.S. foreign policy. It is Kifaya, whose name means “enough,” that has brought democracy activists into the streets here. Abdel-Khalim Qandil, editor of the opposition Al-Arabi newspaper and one of Kifaya’s founders, told me, “Fair elections will bring to power political streams, which in their majority will be against American policy.” His shabby office is adorned with huge pictures of Egypt’s long-dead nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser, who allied Egypt with the Soviet Union.

And most activists agree that the primary beneficiary of a more open political system, at the present moment, would be the Islamists. The nonviolent Muslim Brotherhood is now banned as a party, and its strength is probably not so great as many government officials claim. But it would certainly become a force if the system really opened up.

These political realities make many opposition activists wonder how long the United States will continue to back their efforts. “People in Egypt want to be sure that America is serious and won’t betray us,” said one liberal professional who preferred not to be named. Last fall, Qandil was driven out into the desert by security agents and left there naked as a warning against his activism.

When President Bush protests against mistreatment of the opposition, the Egyptian government backs off. But when the regime senses ambivalence – as when Laura Bush forcefully praised Mubarak’s efforts at democracy when she was in Cairo – then harassment increases. Any activists who openly associate with the United States, or take U.S. aid money for pro-democracy activities, are labeled foreign agents.

That’s why a visit to the judges is so crucial. The judges are a part of the government. They are peaceful patriots who seek to strengthen the Egyptian system from within.

What better way to show that the United States does indeed endorse democratic change – an Egyptian way of change – than to have Secretary Rice call on the august judges? That would send a clear message: The Bush administration endorses the best and brightest of Egypt who want rule of law and enforcement of the constitution.

How could the Mubarak government object to that?