Sunday, January 30, 2011

Egypt's Political Turmoil: Power, Authority and (il) Legitimacy



While not a country of comparative case study for us, we can benefit by watching closely the current political turmoil in Egypt. Along with Rule of Law, for a State to function it needs Power, Authority and Legitimacy. While 30-year President (not democratically elected) Hosni Mubarak is currently refusing to relinquish Power, the regime appears to have lost its Authority and Legitimacy.

CBS News posted this piece from Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan. In it he analyzes how decades of economic stumbles have set the stage for the crumbling of the U.S. ally's regime in the Mid-East:

"On Sunday, there was some sign of the Egyptian military taking on some security duties. Soldiers started arresting suspected looters, rounding up 450 of them. The disappearance of the police from the streets had led to a threat of widespread looting is now being redressed by the regular military. Other control methods were on display. The government definitively closed the Aljazeera offices in Cairo and withdrew the journalists' license to report from there, according to tweets. The channel stopped being broadcast on Egypt's Nilesat. (Aljazeera had not been able to broadcast directly from Cairo even before this move.) The channel, bases in Qatar, is viewed by President Hosni Mubarak as an attempt to undermine him.

Why has the Egyptian state lost its legitimacy? Max Weber distinguished between power and authority. Power flows from the barrel of a gun, and the Egyptian state still has plenty of those. But Weber defines authority as the likelihood that a command will be obeyed. Leaders who have authority do not have to shoot people. The Mubarak regime has had to shoot over 100 people in the past few days, and wound more. Literally hundreds of thousands of people have ignored Mubarak's command that they observe night time curfews. He has lost his authority.

Authority is rooted in legitimacy. Leaders are acknowledged because the people agree that there is some legitimate basis for their authority and power. In democratic countries, that legitimacy comes from the ballot box. In Egypt, it derived 1952-1970 from the leading role of the Egyptian military and security forces in freeing Egypt from Western hegemony. That struggle included grappling with Britain to gain control over the Suez Canal (originally built by the Egyptian government and opened in 1869, but bought for a song by the British in 1875 when sharp Western banking practices brought the indebted Egyptian government to the brink of bankruptcy). It also involved fending off aggressive Israeli attempts to occupy the Sinai Peninsula and to assert Israeli interests in the Suez Canal. Revolutionary Arab nationalist leader Gamal Abdel Nasser (d. 1970) conducted extensive land reform, breaking up the huge Central America-style haciendas and creating a rural middle class. Leonard Binder argued in the late 1960s that that rural middle class was the backbone of the regime. Abdul Nasser's state-led industrialization also created a new class of urban contractors who benefited from the building works commissioned by the government. "

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/30/opinion/main20030008.shtml

2 comments:

Zaic said...

Firstly, al-Jazeera is one of the better news networks in the world and there is a lot of analysis and they are not afraid to show you the violence on the streets. I also love how its not just the US Government which doesn't like al-Jazeera. aljazeera.net/english

Secondly, the protests in Egypt will probably affect oil prices in Europe and North America because most oil and petrol (and about 10% of the world's shipments by sea) go through the Suez canal, which has been on shut down since the protests against (former) President began. I say former as most Egyptians now refer to him in the past tense.

anagha said...

I agree that Al Jazeera's usually more reliable than most American news channels.
Now, to Egypt. I think it's an interesting position politically that the United States and NATO are in right now. They cannot condemn either side for their actions for fear of upsetting whoever does eventually come to power. However, on principle, the United States should support the protesters but economic policies are clear that it would be in our best interest to support the standing government. It will be interesting to see how the Security Council acts as well as this is clearly a problem for the security of the entire region. Egypt has already served as the catalyst for conflict in Yemen and as it is, Lebanon still has no government. The are's a powder keg waiting to explode.