Introduction

What role, if any, did regional factors play in Egypt's ‘failed democratisation’ and the reconsolidation of authoritarianism under Abdel Fattah al-Sisi? Most accounts of Egypt's failed democratisation focus on Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood's shortcomings, political polarisation between Islamists and ‘liberals’, or the Egyptian military and the ‘deep state’. Each of these narratives is largely correct.

Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood demonstrated a staggering degree of incompetence during their short time in power. Many accuse them of far worse: reneging on campaign promises, intimidating critics, secret deals with the military, violence against opponents, and attempting to monopolise power and take over the Egyptian state.

This led to Morsi's downfall, according to this narrative. At the end of only one year in power, Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood had demonstrated both their inexperience and their true intentions and, in the process, alienated the vast majority of Egyptians – so much so that millions took to the streets on 30 June 2013 to demand Morsi's ouster, more than at any time during the 2011 uprising against Hosni Mubarak.

Another narrative focuses on political polarisation. Unlike Tunisia, Egypt's Islamist and ‘secular’ forces failed to reach a critical consensus about a new constitution, the role of religion in politics and the basic rules of the political game in post-Mubarak Egypt. Unwilling to compromise, tensions between Islamists and ‘liberals’ increased to the point of intense hostility and deep mistrust. All sides became locked in what was perceived to be an existential struggle over the character of the Egyptian state and the identity of the nation. Heightened political tensions revealed the Muslim Brotherhood to be much less liberal than it claimed, while Egypt's ‘liberals’ turned out to be far less committed to democracy when they lost elections.

A third explanation attributes the failure of democratisation to the military and the ‘deep state’. Democracy, this argument posits, posed a threat to the country's previously unaccountable generals. Democratic politics entails civilian oversight of the armed forces and requires officers to take orders from elected officials. It also entails greater scrutiny of military budgets. Egypt's generals had become thoroughly accustomed to operating within an ‘officers’ republic’, one in which they enjoyed tremendous power and controlled vast economic resources. Democracy threatened their power and economic empire.