The prospects for the creation of a stable liberal

democracy in Egypt
In this essay I am going to assess the prospects of the creation of a stable liberal democracy in
Egypt by cutting through its history, acknowledging the challenges it faces and looking in prospective
while using pragmatic democratic criterions for it such as representative institutions, vibrant civil society
and a capitalist economy. Egypt is the third largest country by population in Africa, hosting more than 84
million inhabitants. Without a stable civil society, the population being highly dense in the bigger cities
such as Cairo, Alexandria or Port Said, has led to social uprisings and instability for the most of the 20th
century and 2011, the latter being mentioned as the Arab Spring. In order to analyze what are the
prospects for creation of a stable liberal democracy, one must first know how history unfolded and
shaped the character of political, economic and social life.
Since the end of the 19th century, Egypt was under two political systems-monarchy and republic
specifically- and three types of party systems. The multiparty system lasted until the 1952s Revolution.
Instead of moving forward, Egyptian rulers, in trying to reshape the regimes organization have
encountered failure to meet both internal and external challenges as well as *+ the erosion of its
legitimacy.(Arafat,2011:1) This was due to the excessive necessity for regime survival that rulers have
used through state institutions (parties, parliament, and political organizations). Foreign alliances have
shifted from Britain to the United States, from the United States to the Soviet Union, and from the
Soviet Union to the United states. But while changing alliances or orientation necessitates some change
to the elite, the strategy of selecting the elite and the functionalist role of the political organizations
remains intact (Arafat, 2011:1)
Five interesting features have been drawn from this pattern:
(1) Each regime has created its functionalist organization as a vehicle to establish a new ruling
class, in which parties with the help of government intervention produce elites (an artificial
process that prevents parties from developing naturally as effective political movements).
(2) Regimes are trying to seek support of populist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and
businesspeople with influence as members of their new ruling class, to counterbalance the
political weight of their opponents.
(3) Treating the members of Parliament as a faade for representation, an extension of the
regimes functionalist organization. The members of the Parliament are not lawmakers, but
merely used by the regime to acknowledge the peoples fury and demands without actually
addressing them.
(4) The manipulation of the parliamentary election outcomes, in which *+ no natural method
of recruiting and promoting a legitimate political ruling class exists. (Arafat,2011: 2)
(5) The multiparty system has led to fragile political affiliations, the political regime considering
the parties weak and using them as instruments for achieving their own interest.

Gamal Abdal Nasser, the second president of Egypt first started to use functionalist and survival
strategies by forming a new ruling class, destroying political power in the city and at the countryside. He
introduced Land reform as one of his strategy to to dispossess the old ruling class and undermine their
power as much as for reason of equity. (Arafat, 2011:3) Similar actions have been seen under Anwar
Sadat and Hosni Mubarak. Organizing frontal assaults against the opposition, giving substantial power to
elites for regime to withstand and using survival strategies is to be seen as a very limited movement
towards liberal democracy, as people are under-represented in the process.
The second fact worth mentioning is the army economic and political power it has over the
country. The militarys vast economic interests in Egypt are one of those secrets which is not really a
secret. Their social clubs, complexes, villages and products are clear for all to see, but their precise hold
on the countrys economy has never been determined. Analysts have predicted the Egyptian military
control anything from 15 per cent to 40 per cent of the economy.(Sherine Tadros: 2012). Owning over
35 companies, manufacturing products ranging from cars and refrigerators to bottled water, it is clear
that the armys influence over Egypts economic activity cannot be ignored. It is detrimental for Egypts
process of liberal democratization. Though it may seem as the army, acting as a business, helps society
to gain more wealth by accelerating economic activity, it does not offer the same advantages that any
other private company would provide-by that I mean, having shares on the stock market- in order to
give incentive for more economic trade. Furthermore, they are ensuring great political influence through
their activities by becoming increasingly independent: Their soldiers live in their own mini villages. The
army has become a separate entity untouchable by the state with an unaudited economy.(Sherine
Tadros: 2012).
Its role has been extended as a great force to put to question regimes and installing their own
authority as it happened with the military coup dtat in 2013. President Mohamed Morsi was removed
from power and the Egyptian Constitution has been suspended, triggered by an ultimatum of 48 hours
to respond to the demands of the millions of protesters rioting in the capital of Cairo. Head of the armed
forces, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi achieved the ousting of the former president and has had demands to run for
the presidency. The Muslim Brotherhood that underpinned Mr Morsi's presidency has been banned and
declared a "terrorist group" since its ouster.(No author,2013: bbc report) It is a crucial aspect of what
power the military has into internal political affairs because the Muslim Brotherhood is the other side
the spectrum of its opponent This demonstrates that the Egyptian military is no longer just a protective
force over the countries military upheavals, but rather a strong political force which has support of the
population a resourceful capacity to act as a political agent.
A handicap which Egypt is facing could be said to be the American Pressure. There are five
reasons why The United States of America is putting negative pressure over the liberal prospects of
Egypt.
(1) We find the same paranoia resembling the Latin American countries over the presumable
ideology background. As it faced the phobia of Marxism in Latin America, United States
turned its attention to islamophobia. The United States strengthened hardliners (and,
therefore the radicals in opposition) partly because it feared that Marxists would not play by
the democratic rules if they won elections. Opposition moderates were weakened because
radicals could plausibly argue that winning an election would be meaningless, since the
hardliners, with US help would engineer a coup to overthrow an elected opposition

(2)
(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

government. Substitute Islamist for Marxist and you have a reasonable picture of the
key dynamics thwarting a transition to democracy in the Arab region.(Arafat,2011:163)
American credibility has eroded in the Middle East. Its credibility among Arabs is gradually
low, due to its alliance with Israel and the collapsed case against Saddam Hussein.
Third, the messages sent out by Washington are mixed, with erratic fluctuations between
ideological fervor and pragmatism. When Washington overlooks the antidemocratic
behavior of allies while lashing out at other countries for the same sins, one can only
conclude that Washington is manipulating the appeal to democracy for its own
ends.(Gamil:2006)
The failure of the Iraq War strengthened authoritarian caps of US allies. A considerable
amount of Arabs passionately oppose the Iraq war. Arab governments were forced to
decide ether they supported the United States, and by doing so they became far more
insecure domestically. To manage the problem, they preempted organizations, arrested
activists, limited free speech, and in the case of Egypt, extended emergency laws on the eve
of the Iraq War.( Middle East Policy Council,2005:2)
European denial to support the Bush administration projected loopholes in the
democratization. The general cynicism that surfaced is that Washingtons true motives
were to divert attention from policy failures, faulty intelligence, and questionable planning
in Iraq. Europeans also questioned the feasibility of the US pro-democracy drive from
budget constraints, to congressional will before the 2006 elections, to Bushs shaky
domestic mandate. Questions over whether Bushs foreign policy is truly driven by a
domestic US political timeline also continues to breed skepticism. Many Europeans simply
disagree with the coercive means that the Bush administration appears to favor. ( Menotti:
3)
To be relevant in a post- Mubarak Egypt, most opposition parties will need a far stronger
showing in parliament than they have managed since multiparty politics were introduced.
There is a need for deliberation politics in a country such as Egypt because of the lack of
ideology parties have due to pushing forward the elite. When the Muslim Brotherhood
gained eighty-eight parliament seats in 2005, it was a political earthquake that left the
Egyptian political system polarized between the corrupt National Democratic Party and the
elite Muslim Brotherhood. Sadly, the Egyptian people remain sandwiched between them
with no help from the weak, secular opposition parties. This polarization has raised concerns
among Egyptians about the future of democratization, because de National Democratic
Party has failed to deliver genuine political reform and the Muslim Brotherhood has failed to
clarify its ambiguous agenda. (Arafat, 2011:171)

Despite the very grim challenges Egypt is struggling to get over towards a liberal democracy, it
has some strong points in getting there. The internet, satellite TV, mobile telephones and blogs are
there to lead Egypts positive prospects about the future of its liberal democracy. Unlike countries such
as China, where the political pragmatism has planted seeds for the consolidation of the regime,
Venezuela, where there is strong tension and fear about the country by transcending to liberal
democracy being subject to the United States Imperialism, Egypt has one thing set clear: the transition
towards liberal democracy is strongly supported by the population. In bringing the demise of two
regimes, one consisting of authoritative rule and the later of radical religious background. In the years
of 2004 and 2005, many pro-reform movements have emerged in counter-attack to Mubaraks fifth

term and hereditary succession plan. The common denominator among these movements is a desire to
change the Egyptian political landscape (Emad: 2). Movements such as Kiyafa( Enough), The National
Rally for Democratic transformation, Journalists for Change, Workers for Change, Youth for Change and
many more have worked well to show that Egypt isnt waned by what it is seen a lack of stability in the
country. By spreading information in ways that are difficult for the national government to control, the
process of eroding state control has already begun. Journalists and NGOs were among the first Arabs to
use the internet. Today virtually every Arab newspaper has experimented with online content, and the
larger NGOs have Websites. The new generations are more interested in political affairs than the
previous ones. In December 2002 the first online petition for Egypt which was called No to hereditary
rule in Egypt was posted on the Internet and gathered over 1000 signatures(No Author:13)
Another mentionable thing is that Egypts transition is less complex than other countries in the
Middle East. There is no need for a nation-building process because Egypt is the oldest nation-state in
the region, has clear boundaries settled and a powerful national identity.
By a way of conclusion, Egypt is facing a difficult challenge to bend towards liberal democracy.
The elites influence in political affairs as well as the armys; lack of ideology in the parties, external
stigmatization and instability pose a harsh reality the country is confronting with. However, Modern
Technology such as the internet, and a huge popular support for the transition are seen as relevant to
be counted as a counterbalance. Whatever Egypts future might be it cannot be known precisely. One
thing that is clearly set is that it is a matter of time until Egypts civil society will be exercising the rule of
law. The populations motivation is to be considerably important. The remains of a poorly exercised
political praxis are to be shaped into a better reaching approach as the youth of todays Egypt is taking
big steps towards the consolidation of liberal democracy.

Bibliography
Mattar Gamil, A marriage made in hell: March 30April 5, 2006
Middle East Policy Council;. Thirthy-ninth in the Capitoll Hill Conference Series on U.S. Middle East
Policy, Democracy: Rising Tide or Mirage? Middle East policy journal, vol. 12, no.2( Summer 2005),
Unedited Transcript
Menotti Roberto, Democratize but Stabilize: Democracy in the Middle East Middle East quarterly vol
13, no.3
Shahin Emad El-din, Egypts Moment of reform 2
No Author, reforming Egypt:13
Alaa Al-Din Arafat (2011)Hosni Mubarak and the Future of Democracy in Egypt: Palgrave MacMillan
Sherine Tadros(2012)- Al Jazeera news report
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/2012215195912519142.html
No author (2014) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19256730