Modern Egypt always has been a difficult country to govern. Physical control has been a relatively simple task, for the Egyptians are by nature a submissive people. But positive plans for development continually have been defeated by Egyptian inertia and lack of public responsibility…
Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Download file to see previous pages
The nationalist revival during the period of British occupation revealed a public awareness among a segment of Cairo's population, but this seldom was transacted into positive achievements. Instead, the Egypt of 1952 was a stagnant country. Beset by political strife, successive national governments did little to foster the country's development. An archaic structure of land ownership, abysmal living conditions among the great majority of the population, an economy geared to benefit a privileged few, and political instability--this was the legacy after thirty years of independence (Frederick, 268).
The existing political parties abdicated their right to govern. In their struggle with the King and their quest for power and office, they treaded ruthlessly on the welfare of their country. Egypt's political structure blocked progress, rooted as it was in the status quo. No parliament controlled by wealthy landowners and Cairo's privileged social elite would support sweeping reform programs to the detriment of the vested interests.
Few groups were untainted by the corruption which permeated Cairo. Many ranking civil servants owed their positions to partisan politics; landowners gained protection from the Wafd; businessmen were dependent upon the government for favors; and high ranking military officers often owed their posts to the King's personal support. Only the middle-class military--the captains, majors, and colonels, and, perhaps, a few generals--had the moral credentials for a bona fide movement of reform. And, after the sordid manipulation of the Alexandria cotton market and the collapse of national government in 1952, only the military was prepared to take action in the name of the people.
Humiliated in the 1948 Palestine War, the Egyptian army generally had done little to distinguish itself. In its ranks, however, was a cadre of sincere and talented, though inexperienced, officers, and it was they who toppled the government in 1952. Initially, a junta sought to establish a nonpartisan civilian government, but this body proved unwilling to initiate the reforms desired by the young officers. Thus, the job of governing fell to the Free Officers by default. Governing had not been their initial purpose, and they were ill prepared for the task; but they alone were in a position to raze the "old order." And the destruction of the "old order" was a prerequisite for the implementation of profound reforms (Frederick 269).
Role in Modernizing Egypt
Rapid development in Egypt required an authoritarian government, and it became increasingly obvious that the Revolutionary Command Council could not measure up to the task. Instead, a single leader, a man with dictatorial powers, was needed. Gamal Abdel Nasser became dictator of Egypt in April, 1954. His was a difficult task. The country had not rallied to the military movement. Moreover, there was no panacea for Egypt's problems, and his every move drew the sniping attacks of those without the responsibilities for government. To his credit, he approached his mission boldly. Easy as it was to be irresolute, he determined what was best for
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
Cite this document
(“Gamal Abdel Nasser Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/politics/1521485-gamal-abdel-nasser
(Gamal Abdel Nasser Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 Words)
“Gamal Abdel Nasser Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/politics/1521485-gamal-abdel-nasser.
his hand picked cabinet.
B. In brief, and as this paper will hopefully demonstrate, emergency law in Egypt has been unconstitutionally exercised and implemented, not for the purpose of maintaining security and protecting the citizens and society, but as a weapon against that society, the Egyptian citizenry and against the very concept of human rights itself, with the ultimate consequence being the expansion of the powers of the presidency beyond its constitutional limits.
The Suez Canal is an artificial waterway which connects the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. It is a 160 km long channel which is made through the Sinai Desert. The canal was designed by a French engineer Ferdinand de Lesseps. He was also a diplomat and won the approval for the construction of the canal through the Viceroy of Egypt (Lesseps and Volff 1).
Countries ranging from Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Lebanon and Iraq are all facing acute levels of civil wars, internal conflicts and the governments in these countries fail to satisfy the people. According to the writer, the divide between the governments and the people seem ‘so yawning’.
There has been a long-lasting conflict in the Middle Eastern Politics between the ideology of Arab nationalism and the ideology of Islamic revival, which has incongruously added fuel on to the burning fire in the politics of this region. Significantly, the ideology of Arab nationalism was developed in the 1950s and 60s under the leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and the Ba’ath Parties of Syria and Iraq.
The author explains that Ayatollah Khomeini and Gamal Abdul-Nasser have both played an important role in the historical activities of the 20th century in the Middle East. This is because their leadership was revolutionary, and they played a role in changing the various governments that existed in Egypt, and Iran.
Nasser's hometown of Beni Mur in Asyut district lacked distinction and could have been mistaken for any of the hundreds of mid-size villages in lower Egypt or "Said" as Egyptians call that part of the country. Beni Mur was where his family came from but Nasser was not born there.
This was necessary since the government was to protect the American’s wealth and wellbeing; hence the need for the continued military presence. Since there was a lot of dependence on the oil from the Persian Gulf, it was
the ideology, the borders of Arab world have been artificially created by the Turks, Europeans and the greedy emperors of Arab nations or else the Arab world is naturally unified and can be categorised as one nation like the United States. Pan-Arabism, on the other hand, is an
Some of the reasons I gathered is that the citizens view you as a dictator as have been presidents before you and they are tired of the rule of absolute monarchy with presidential seat being inherited. Furthermore, the
3 Pages(750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Save Your Time for More Important Things
Let us write or edit the essay on your topic
"Gamal Abdel Nasser"
with a personal 20% discount.