In the wake of the second World War a new military coup was being swiftly formed in Egypt by a group of junior officers. It was called the Free Officers movement. Soon after its formation Gamal ‘Abd al-Nasser as a result of a populist movement became their leader. According to the group they launched this movement “to put an end to that corruption, ineptitude and treason” (The modern middle east p.238) that was very apparent in the wake of the war and colonialism. As the military offices began to take control they had the tough task of having to weaken the grasp of the social elite on the rest of the population. The effects of the elite were largely seen by their actions in parliament. This was easily seen as the large landowners who are …show more content…
Nasser’s influence wasn’t solely in Egypt, after the success with land reform other countries in the region begin to implement similar land reform laws allowing a middle class to emerge and greatly improving the lives of many working class wage laborers who were previously repressed.
Egypt in the 1950s and 1960s was the leader of the Arab world and under the control of Nasser they set out to solve many of the issues of colonialism. Another prominent issue at the time was there was very little infrastructure in Egypt and the infrastructure they had exists mostly to push agricultural commodities to market. Other forms of infrastructure were also lacking. For example, Egypt didn’t have a large school system until the 1950s. There was also economic imbalances, one of which has to do with a small upper-class of ruling elite, the other having to do with how foreign interests capture large sectors of the economy; not a lot of industrial development, and then state-led industrial development. Land is not equitably distributed; there was a lack of an independent army outside of British control; and the country was misrepresented within politics because of the British involvement. Among the newly forming nation states we see Arab countries like Egypt starting to confront these issues and impart emerge as an independent nation state. That is absolute autonomy and sovereignty over their territory. During this time there were two main
Amongst the turbid and dysfunction that is the Middle East lies the nation of Egypt. Egypt, a major country of the Middle East, is habitually considered stereotypical of Middle Eastern civilization, but further research guides one to the conclusion that Egypt is far from a generic Middle Eastern country. Egypt has a strong tradition of nationalism that has been formed during its history, giving it a national unity that is often non-existent in other Middle Eastern nations (1). This, as well as other advantages that Egypt has gained during its past, has allowed it to rise above the problems plaguing the rest of the Middle East and to form basically its
Egypt, in contrast to Palestine, was the leader of the Arab world. In the 1800s, Egypt, under the leadership of Muhammad Ali, began a campaign of “defensive modernization”; that is, an importation of military and economic principles of the West in an effort to rejuvenate the Arab world and its culture. The khedives (rulers) who succeeded Ali continued his campaign of modernization by constructing new facilities; the Suez Canal, an important position in trade between Europe and the Far East, was constructed in 1869. However, this modernization invited the imperialism that Egypt sought to avoid ; in 1883, Egypt became a “veiled protectorate” (an unofficial colonial dependency), and on the eve of World War I, a formal British protectorate was established until the Egyptian Revolution of 1952.
The effects of Egypt’s control can be shown in, “In Nubia, Egypt imposed direct control and pressed the native population to adopt Egyptian language and culture…Egypt fully participated in the diplomatic and commercial networks linking the states of Western Asia. Egyptian soldiers, administrators, diplomats, and merchants traveled widely, bringing back new fruits and vegetables, new musical instruments, and new technologies…” (page 73, paragraphs 11-12). Egypt used their power to create a sort of “mini-Egypt”, this caused a rise an Egyptian practices and culture. In addition to spreading their own culture, Egypt also gathered from others. They used their connections, created through their territorial expansion, in order to learn and evolve their civilization. As a result of this, their actions and habits may have changed. It’s important to know how societies may influence and change one another, whether it be through force or trade.
The latter half of the 20th century was an incredibly turbulent time for Egypt as regimes cycled in and out every couple decades and the country seemed to always be at war. “The Yacoubian Building”, a 2002 film, illustrated how the resulting corrupted government and abysmal economy affected Egypt’s population, especially the lower classes. Additionally, the viewer saw how these two factors led to both the appalling treatment of women and the rise of violent insurgency groups.
These circumstances bring into question whether the country’s policies will change in a manner that is not correlated with past experiences with imperialistic powers. Will Egypt one day have an infrastructure created for the sake of cultural improvement while not confirming to an uber-nationalistic or imperially imitative framework? The answer is not clear at the moment, but what is clear is how Egypt’s past with imperial authorities has and can shape its
Have you ever wondered how Ancient Egypt helped shape the world today? Ancient Egyptians were a group of folks who were heavily influenced by religion. They feared dying anywhere but Egypt. The Egyptian Empire held a fascinating and very distinctive culture. Being one of the world 's most advanced cultures and creating tons of wealth is what separated them from everybody else. Between the outstanding artwork, teaching methods, and amazing pyramids is what helped their society advance altogether. No other civilization of the ancient world history had such a popular appeal and none as important as human society and its organization. Egyptians have made great steps in shaping the world we all know today, which have made studying their culture and society easier than some previous historical eras.
When the trip made a stop in Fayum, I was able to sit with Mohamed Hamada and have a one on one conversation late into the night. We talked about a lot of topics, but we ended on more of a personal note, with him giving me his personal opinion of the current state of the Egyptian government, Mubarak, and the second revolution – he used the word coup. He said one statement that helped me create what this paper is going to be about. He stated, “we (Egypt) do not have pharaohs, we make them.” After further deliberating on this phrase, he stated that the way that the dictators are treated, through glorification and everyone doing whatever they can for them, the Egyptian culture placing a strong importance on authority, and never wishing to
Colonial power ruled Egypt for almost a hundred years, exploiting and extracting as much wealth from Egypt as possible. After this long period of subjection to outside rule, Gamal Abdel Nasser became president of Egypt in 1956. He was the first Egyptian who was a ruler “of the people.” Egyptians, Arab nationalists, and many other world leaders loved Nasser and his leadership. His swift, bloodless takeover and rise to president in conjunction with his smooth, calm speeches gained him popularity. What truly made him infamous was his nationalization of the Suez Canal Company that ended British influence in Egypt. Decades after his death, Nasser is still believed to be “greater than that of many other political leader since the Prophet Mohamed” . However, many of Nasser’s actions demand that his rule be reconsidered. Nasser 's nationalization of the media, repression of political opponents, institutionalized torture of the Muslim Brotherhood, and failure to successfully implement his national planning all suggest that Nasser’s actions contributed to the many economic, political, and military problems Egypt faces today
Nasser's popularity in Egypt and the Arab world skyrocketed after his nationalization of the Suez Canal and his political victory in the subsequent Suez Crisis. Calls for pan-Arab unity under his leadership increased, culminating with the formation of the United Arab Republic with Syria (1958–1961). In 1962, Nasser began a series of major socialist measures and modernization reforms in Egypt.
Using Karabell’s social history Parting the Desert, for nineteenth century Egypt, and al-Zayyat’s novel The Open Door for twentieth century Egypt, this essay observes Egyptian Nationalism throughout the period. Parting the Desert tells the tale of the Suez Canal, its design, financing, building, and eventual war. The Open Door presents a twentieth century coming of age during the period Britain viewed the Suez Canal as a vital strategic asset, Egypt took control of the Suez Canal and nationalized it, starting war. First part of the paper will discuss the drivers of nationalism for both books. Then, the comparison of Egyptian Nationalism will start with Parting the
Most individuals who were involved in the protests were led by the belief that it was through the protests that they could better their lives. The majority of the Egyptian citizens have felt down, trodden and despised over the recent years by their governments. Most governments were revolts were witnessed had stayed in power for a long period of time. In Egypt, for example, Mubarak had stayed in power for more than 40 years. Removing him from powered through democratic means had borne no fruits since most presidential elections had been marred by instances or rigging and corruption. He had therefore instituted himself as a president for life. One aspect of Mubarak’s governments was that it was dictatorial. Besides, the people surrounding Mubarak were so powerful that talking negatively about the president could easily lead an individual into trouble.
To understand the state and Nasser’s vision it as he came to power in 1956 it is important to understand the national narrative from this point onward, focusing on the state’s mandate and identifying the important ideological elements to the Nasser regime. The purpose is not to provide a large historical overview of the events that led to his rise in power and what kept him in his position afterwards but instead to focus on the goals Nasser hoped to accomplish. Best crystallised in The Philosophy of Religion the role of the government is to facilitate the “right path” that will lead Egypt to become a modern nation such as those seen in Egypt. As he states in the book, “Which is the way [for the state to be free]? And what is our role in it? The way is that which leads to economic and political freedom. Our role is the role of watchmen only, no more no less.” From this statement it is clear that Nasser saw the Egyptian state as a nation that had been placed into a state of disarray due to
The Suez Canal, constructed between 1859 and 1869, connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea. The canal was of great importance to Britain during the World Wars; not only did it connect Britain to its colonies allowing for more direct trade routes, but it connected Britain to the oilfields of the Persian Gulf (“Suez Crisis”). As such, Britain vehemently protected the canal, to the degree that it declared Egypt a protectorate during World War I and sent troops when the canal was threatened to protect its interests. The troops remained even when Egypt was given nominal independence, which gave the Egyptians a sense of subordination. Feelings of resentment festered within the Egyptians until the 1950s, when a nationalist movement broke out, during which the Egyptians took back the Suez Canal, resulting in a brief struggle called the Suez Crisis. The Suez Crisis marked a pivotal moment in international politics in which Egypt, a ‘weak’ country stood up to the Global Power, Britain, and ultimately succeeded, causing drastic shifts in political power on a global scale.
Also, with regards to foreign policy, Egypt continues to emphasize the need for an effective and influential role for itself at both the regional and international levels. The authorities believe in having important synergies in the economic and political realms with the different countries of the Arab World. Relations have been strong with the EU owing