Roots of the Egyptian conflict



Roots of the Egyptian conflict

Abstract

Egypt as a country has one of the longest histories known to man. As far as 10th millennium BC, the land was inhabited by people. Around the world today it is known primarily due to its famous landmarks; the pyramids, the sphinx at Giza and the river Nile. It has also been a witness to innumerable conflicts, wars revolutions and strife. What this essay will look at are the causes of the conflict in Egypt with respect to the theories of international relations. We will also try to examine the causes of the failure of democracy to take root in the country, and its adverse effects on the institutions in place.

Introduction

The roots of the present day conflict can be traced many hundreds of years ago, when the country was still a part of the Ottoman Empire. A frontier territory, its governance was seldom comfortable, and in effect, there remained a power struggle between the ottomans and the Mamluks; the traditional rulers of Egypt. This fight, as we shall see ahead caused many a problem for the area, and for the social culture as well, as it caused an active militarization of the country. This was set against the backdrop of international power, which combined with the establishment of the state of Israel, led to immense problems for the country and led to many internal conflicts.

International relations theories and the Egyptian conflict

After Egypt was granted independence in 1922, a weak succession of rulers followed suit. The rulers were mostly under foreign influence and were less concerned with domestic affairs. The government of king farouk, was mostly occupied in keeping the rising tide of nationalism in check. Following the incident in 1942, there was an ever increasing resentment towards the British and the wafd party, and this led to the dissatisfied army group seizing power in 1952, and establishing army rule over Egypt. Col naguib became the president and swiftly oversaw the influx of military officers in the institutions of the state.

We can thus see here that naguib, closely follows the theory of realism. The classic theory of international relations contends that, states seek to increase their power in relation to other states, as the world is a dangerous place.

Naguib's view follows the principle that he wanted his country to be stronger than Israel, as the defeat in the war of 1948, had a negative impact on the nationalist sentiments of the country. Naguib was eventually replaced by the popular and charismatic Gemal Abdul Nasser. This incident marks a turning point in the history of the country. It was after this incident that the army began taking an active part in the politics of Egypt. The doctrine now being set was not by the elected representatives, but by generals who will now determine the way forward. As a way of policy change, gemal decided in 1956 to nationalize the Suez Canal and bring it under the control of the ...