A system piled up with the past.

Evaluate the extent to which this is a true reflection of

Mubaraks administration.

The question requires one to assess the similarities of the Mubaraks administration with that
of his predecessor and also to give a degree of the differences.

The history of Egypt under Hosni Mubarak spans a period of 29 years, beginning with the
1981 assassination of President Anwar Sadat and lasting until the Egyptian revolution of
January 2011, when Mubarak was overthrown in a popular uprising as part of the
broader Arab Spring movement. His presidency was marked by a continuation of the policies
pursued by his predecessor, including the liberalization of Egypt's economy and a
commitment to the 1979 Camp David Accords. The Egyptian government under Mubarak
also maintained close relations with the other member states of the Arab League, as well as
the United States, Russia, and much of the Western World. The Mubarak government and
that of Sadat were removed from power through force. Human Rights were not respected
during the Mubarak era. Political censorship, police brutality, arbitrary detention, torture, and
restrictions on freedoms of speech, association, and assembly were some of the concerns
raised about the Mubaraks administration. However, the Mubarak administration had things
which differentiated it from that of Sadat. Illiteracy was reduced to a greater extent, the
Egyptian economy was improved.

During the Sadat presidency, Egyptians began to obtain more of their income from outside
Egypt. Between 1974 and 1985, more than three million Egyptians, construction workers,
labourers, mechanics, plumbers, electricians as well as young teachers and accountants
migrated to the Persian Gulf region. Remittances from these workers allowed families in
Egypt to earn a living and even also to purchase valuable items like cars, television and so
forth. From 1981 when Mubarak took office, the number of migrants was still high up until
1990s. From the information above, one can simply says that Mubarak had inherited a
problem of employment; he tried to overcome it but failed to eradicate the problem hence
labelled as the imitator of his predecessor. This means that his administration was similar
with that of Sadat in terms of unemployment.

As of 1989, early in the Mubarak era, Egypt continued to have a skewed distribution of
wealth; about 2,000 families had annual incomes in excess of 35,000 Egyptian pounds (E),
while more than four million people earned less than E200. Social conditions in Egypt
improved but modernization did not succeed in reaching a critical mass of its citizens,
furthermore, some of the recent gains were reversed due to the 2008 food price crisis and fuel
price shock and to the global crisis-related slowdown in economic activity, according to the
World Bank (2010).

In foreign affairs, Sadat also launched gigantic transformation from the Nasserism. President
Sadat evolved Egypt from a policy of aggressive type of character with Israel to one of
peaceful accommodation through talks. According to Rabinovich (2005) Sadat signed a peace
treat with Israel in 1979 witnessed by President Jimmy Carter of United States. Sadat's
willingness to break ranks by making peace with Israel earned him the enmity of most other
Arab states, however. To imitate his predecessor, President Mubarak also maintained
relations with the long foe of Egypt (Israel). Like Sadat, Mubarak earned enmity for himself
from within because of his perpetuation with the so called Camp David Accords.

During the Mubarak era, Egypt was a strong ally of the United States, whose aid to Egypt
was about $2 billion a year from the 1979 signing of the Camp David Peace Accords (New
York Times, 2011). Remember, the Accords were signed by Sadat, which means that the
funds had been supplied since the reign of Sadat. Mubarak assumed power in 1981 and also
continued to enjoy the fruits which had been left by Sadat. It is not surprising that these funds
were not used for the benefit of the majority instead the Presidents used these funds for the
benefit of their families since these two governments were accused of corruption.

Mubarak entered in to an allied coalition in the 1991 Gulf War. Egyptian forces became some
of the first to land in Saudi Arabia to expel Iraqi forces from the land of Kuwait (Graham
2010). The participation of Egypt in the coalition was regarded as essential by the United
States in attracting Arab support for the liberation of Kuwait. Although unpopular among
Egyptians, the participation of Egyptian forces brought financial benefits for the Egyptian
government. Reports that sums as large as $500,000 per soldier were paid or debts forgiven
were published in the news media according to the Economist: The same happened to Sadat
who also was unpopular when he signed the Camp David Accords. The Egyptians were
antagonised by the decision which was taken by Sadat in 1989.

Egypt is a semi-presidential republic under Emergency Law (Law No. 162 of 1958) and this
law has been since 1967, which shows that the Mubarak administration was just but a
repletion of what was done by his predecessors. According to the law, police powers were
extended, constitutional rights suspended and censorship was legalized. The law strictly
prohibited any non-governmental political activity: street demonstrations, non-approved
political organizations, and unregistered financial donations were totally banned. Some
17,000 people were detained under the law, and estimates of political prisoners run as high as
30,000. The state of emergence gave the government the power to imprison individuals for
any period of time and also for no reason, thus keeping persons in prisons without trials.
Egyptians were persecuted since 1967 when the law was enacted up to 2011, when they
safeguard themselves from constrains of the law. The government claimed that opposition
groups like the Muslim Brotherhood could come into power in Egypt if the current
government did not forgo parliamentary elections, confiscate the group's main financiers'
possessions, and detain group figureheads, actions which are virtually impossible without
emergency law and judicial-system independence prevention. It is not surprising that most of
the elections which the NDP won were because of the 1967 state emergence law (Amnesty
International 2011).

Because of his positions against Islamic fundamentalism and his diplomacy towards Israel,
Mubarak was the target of repeated assassination attempts. According to the BBC, Mubarak
survived six attempts on his life. In June 1995, there was an alleged assassination attempt
involving harmful gases and Egyptian Islamic Jihad while Mubarak was in Ethiopia for a
conference of the Organization of African Unity. He was also reportedly injured by a knife-
wielding assailant in Port Said in September 1999. Assassination attempts did not start with
Mubarak. Nasser was also attempted; Sadat was assassinated on the 6 October 1981. Though
Mubarak was not killed like Sadat, the attempts were a clear indication that the
administration was not contenting the majority of Egypt.

Moreover, the governments of Egypt from that of Nasser to that of Mubarak were enemies of
the Muslim Brotherhood, a political party founded in Egypt in 1928. It should be noted that
the Muslim Brotherhood was a great enemy of the Egyptian governments because of the
Emergence Law which gave them the right to excise power extremely. Through the
amendment of the law, the Muslim Brotherhood was kept an illegal organisation and not
recognised as a political party. Mubarak went on to prohibit the formation of political parties
based on religion. This apparently shows the relationship which existed between Mubarak
and the Muslim Brotherhood. Because of his positions against Islamic fundamentalism and
his diplomacy towards Israel, Mubarak was the target of repeated assassination attempts.

During the early years in power, Mubarak extended the Egyptian State Security
Investigations Service (Mabahith Amn ad-Dawla) and the Central Security Forces (anti-riot
and containment forces). According to Tarek Osman, the experience of seeing his
predecessor assassinated "right in front of him" and his lengthy military careerwhich was
longer than those of Nasser or Sadat may have instilled in him more focus and absorption
with security than seemed the case with the latter heads of state. Mubarak did this to protect
himself from Egyptian governments enemy (Muslim Brotherhood), who had killed his
predecessor. He knew very well that the Muslim Extremists would do the same before him.
On the other side, the Muslims wanted to put to an end the ruthless of the Egyptian autocratic
governments which existed with its weapon (State Emergence Law No. 162 of 1958).

During Mubarak's reign, unrest in Egypt was now rampant mostly caused by the Jihads. In
February 1986 the Central Security Forces moved along streets, rioting, burning and looting
goods from all nearby houses in demand for better pay. Sadat introduced a new economic
policy, the most important aspect known as the infitah or openness. This reduced
government controls over the economy and encouraged private investment. While the reform
was in progress, it created social classes within Egypt (a wealthy and successful upper class
and a small middle class), this policy had little effect on the average Egyptian who started to
grow dissatisfied with Sadat's rule. In 1977, Infitah policies led to massive spontaneous riots
('Bread Riots') involving hundreds of thousands of Egyptians when the state announced that it
was retiring subsidies on basic foodstuffs. Infitah has been criticized as bringing wild rents,
land speculations, inflation, and corruption. Unrest is one of the issues which was found in
Sadat and Mubaraks administrations. That is why the Mubarak administration is related with
that of Sadat.

The Mubarak era was just but a replica of the Sadat era. The Sadat administration used armed
forces to silence uprisings in Egypt. Towards the end of his tenure Sadat ordered the Egyptian
soldiers to destruct the Muslim Brotherhoods buildings who had opposed Presidents support
towards women. The same happened during the Mubarak era in 1992, when more than ten
thousand soldiers occupied the Cairo shantytown suburb of Imbaba. The soldiers took about
six weeks arresting and removing more than four thousand people after al-Gamaa al
Islamiyya followers of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman attempted to take control of the area.

While in office, political corruption in the Mubarak administration's Ministry of Interior rose
dramatically, due to the increased power over the institutional system that is necessary to
secure the prolonged presidency. Such corruption has led to the imprisonment of political
figures and young activists without trials, illegal undocumented hidden detention facilities,
and rejecting universities, mosques, newspapers staff members based on political
inclination. On a personnel level, each individual officer is allowed to violate citizens'
privacy in his area using unconditioned arrests due to the emergency law. Sadat dismantled
much of the existing political machine and brought to trial a number of former government
officials accused of criminal excesses during the Nasser era. In February 1981, Egyptian
authorities were alerted to El-Jihad's plan by the arrest of operative carrying crucial
information. In September, Sadat ordered a highly unpopular roundup of more than 1500
people, including many Jihad members, but also the Coptic Pope and other Coptic clergy,
intellectuals and activists of all ideological stripes. All non-government press was banned as
well. The round up missed a Jihad cell in the military led by Lieutenant Khalid Islambouli,
who succeeded in assassinating Anwar Sadat that October. From the information above,
Sadat and Mubarak were not willing to cede other the opportunity to rule Egypt that is why
they performed crucial acts before their fellow country men.

According to the Amnesty International (2011), freedom of

expression, association and assembly was limited under Mubarak. The Press Law,
Publications Law, and the penal code regulated the press, and called for punishment by fines
or imprisonment for those who criticized the president. Sadat dismantled much of the
existing political machine and brought to trial a number of former government officials
accused of criminal excesses during the Nasser era. Sadat tried to expand participation in the
political process in the mid-1970s but later abandoned this effort. In the last years of his life,
all political parties were banned. The most targeted political party was the Muslim
Brotherhood. Due to the abolition of participation in politics of various political parties,
freedom of expression, association and assembly was limited. This was the reason why Egypt
wracked by violence arising from discontent with Sadat's rule. It is plausible to commend that
Mubarak copy a lot from his predecessor and that the reason why his administration had been
piled with the past.

The Mubarak administration was removed from power by means of force. In 2011 an
uprising took place in Cairo, Egypt, which finally removes President Mubarak from the post
of being a statesman. Sadat was also removed from power by means of force. He was
assassinated by the Muslim Extremists led by Khalid on 6 October 1981.

Mubarak, like his predecessors, he also went into war when his forces became one of the first
to land in Saud Arabia to evict Iranian forces from Kuwait in 1991. For him to fight the war,
he entered a coalition with United States. Sadat did the same when he also entered a coalition
with Syria to fight Israel in 1973. Nasser also entered a coalition with to fight Israel in 1967.
As a last man, Mubarak is regarded as the perpetuator of what was done by his predecessors.
Nevertheless, it is not fair to label Mubarak as the imitator of Sadat. Mubarak did a lot of
things which were quite different from Sadat. Since he had inherited a lot of economic, social
and also political problems, he managed to solve these problems though to a limited extent.
The economy of Egypt since the Sadat rule was not good but when Mubarak came into power
in 1981, he tried his best to change the economic situation which was left by Sadat. Though
Mubarak was not popular for joining the coalition of 1991, he managed to obtain finance to
uplift the economic level of his country.

Illiteracy was greatly reduced during the Mubarak era which distinguishes him from the past.
About forty per cent of women were able to read and write during the Sadat rule. After then,
Mubarak widened the education system and gave majority of women the opportunity to learn.
The education system for women greatly separates Mubarak from Sadat.

Mubarak was not willing at all to visit Jerusalem like what was done by Sadat during his
presidency. Following the Sinai Disengagement Agreements of 1974 and 1975, Sadat created
a fresh opening for progress by his dramatic visit to Jerusalem in November 1977. This led to
the invitation from President Jimmy Carter of the United States to President Sadat and Israeli
Prime Minister Begin to enter trilateral negotiations at Camp David.

In a nutshell, Mubarak had done a lot of things which were also done by Sadat. The kind of
administrations were similar which forced historians to phrase that, a system piled with the
past, referring to Mubaraks administration. However, though Mubarak is being labelled as
imitator of Sadat, he has done things which were quite unique to what was done by his
predecessor
REFERENCES.

Graham, N.( 2010). "Middle East Peace Talks: Israel, Palestinian Negotiations More Hopeless Than
Ever". The Huffington.

Kirkpatrick, David D. (28 January 2011). "Egypt Calls In Army as Protesters Rage". New York Times.
Retrieved 28 January 2011.

Rabinovich, A. (2005). The Yom Kippur War: The Epic Encounter That Transformed the Middle East.
New York, NY: Schocken Books

Vatikiotis, P. J. (1992). The History of Modern Egypt (4th edition Ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University.

"Egypt: Abuses under State of Emergency". Amnesty International. June 2011. Retrieved 23
March 2017.

Egypt under Mubarak, Amnesty International, June 2011. Retrieved 14 February 2017.

"The Failure at Camp David - Part III Possibilities and pitfalls for further negotiations". Texas.
Retrieved 9 April 2017.

"Egypt and Israel Sign Formal Treaty, Ending a State of War After 30 Years; Sadat and Begin Praise
Carter's Role". The New York Times.2011. Retrieved 17 February 2017.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090219170414/http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/02/18/66736.html.
Archived from the original on 19 February 2009. Retrieved 25 April 2017.