Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Unrequited Moderation: Credible Commitments and State Repression in Egypt

  • Published:
Studies in Comparative International Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In strategic accounts of democratization, credible commitments by the opposition shape whether incumbents will relinquish power. Revisiting Kalyvas’s study of Algeria and Belgium, this article introduces evidence from Egypt that shows the structural readiness of incumbents remains as consequential as commitment credibility. During the period 1990–2008 the credibility of democratic commitments by the Egyptian opposition improved along the lines identified by Kalyvas. Unlike its Algerian counterpart, the Islamic movement in Egypt was able to “silence the radicals” and, after 1998, emit a non-dissonant message of electoral participation without militia violence. This improvement in commitment credibility was not reciprocated by Egyptian elites, who enjoyed western support and a sturdy repressive apparatus. Similar factors obstructed the Algerian opposition and they indicate a more disciplined, less dissonant Islamic party would have been unlikely to effect a democratic transition. Transitions are most likely when a credibly committed opposition faces an elite ready to rotate power. The second factor helps explain the success of the Catholic party in Belgium and the failure of comparable Islamic movements in North Africa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Credible commitments originated in the deterrence literature of international relations (Schelling 1956, 1960). Its usage in comparative democratization shares more with Dahl’s approach than with Thomas Schelling’s.

  2. I follow this convention, and that of subsequent works, to distinguish “moderates” and “radicals” based on the methods they use (see, for example, Snyder 1998: 52; Hafez 2003: 5; and, especially, Schwedler 2006: 8). Moderates refrain from violent attacks and engage the state via the available institutions, including elections. Through such channels they typically pursue non-revolutionary political reform. Radicals are willing to physically attack government officials and civilians. They often embrace a revolutionary agenda of overhauling the state.

  3. An alternative interpretation of opposition victory in Belgium and failure in Algeria would be that there is something about all Islamic parties that prevents them from credibly pledging to honor a non-revolutionary electoral mandate. Kalyvas rejects that notion, citing the historic malleability of religious doctrines (2000: 384–385).

  4. In a prior article Kalyvas depicted the Catholic party as contributing to democratic “consolidation,” rather than to a democratic transition in Belgium (1998: 292–295). The present analysis supports that approach, which recognizes a significant structural difference between the democratizing context of 19th century Belgium and the authoritarian situation in late 20th century Algeria.

  5. I have chosen not to use the term “Islamist,” and instead render the Arabic adjectives islami(ya) and muslim(a) through their conventional English equivalents: Islamic and Muslim. My use of the term Islamic political movements comports with Omar Ashour’s definition: “sociopolitical movements which base and justify their political principles, ideologies, behaviors, and objectives on their understanding of Islam or on their understanding of a certain past interpretation of Islam” (2007). For accounts of how these terms evolved, consult Kramer (2003), Lockman (2004: 172–173, 216), Schwedler (2006: 8–11), and Roy (1994).

  6. The attack was precipitated by the state’s assassination of Jama`a spokesman Ala Muhyi al-Din earlier that year (Hafez 2003: 84). For a close account of deteriorating relations between the state and the Jama`a in the late 1980s, see Kassem (2004: 150–154).

  7. Although the Society of Muslim Brothers has not been formally licensed as a political party, in comparative analysis the group is normally regarded as a party, because of “the Brotherhood’s well-knit organization, its distinct ideology and political orientation, its substantial following, but above all because the Brotherhood, in fact, does operate as a party, typically running candidates in national elections under their own colors” (Zaki 1995: 75).

  8. In 1976 the Muslim Brothers won six seats through Sadat’s “Center Party” platform. In 1984 12 of the Brothers’ members were elected alongside the Wafd and the group gained 36 seats in the 1987 elections through a similar partnership with the Liberal (al-Ahrar) and Labor (al-`Aml) parties (Pripstein-Posusney 1998: 14–15; International Crisis Group 2004: 12).

  9. The number of effective parties is based on the share of seats parties hold in parliament. Gary W. Cox (1997).

  10. In 1993 al-Jama`a leader Tal`Fuad Qasim said the group rejected the Brothers’ tactics and ideas: “Our disagreements with the brothers prevent cooperation” (Mubarak 1995: 41).

  11. It is hard to know how many SMB victories the regime deemed acceptable but prime minister Ahmed Nazif hinted at one possibility on American television, “Let them prove that they are real democrats through the process that exists today. Let them have twenty, thirty independents in parliament and see how they'll behave.” Newsmaker: Ahmed Nazif, NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, May 20, 2005.

  12. Aims of the Egyptian opposition during this period included such non-revolutionary changes as ending the State of Emergency and its martial law conditions, putting term limits on the president, and lifting restrictions on the formation and operation of political parties.

  13. “Egypt’s Party’s Committee Seizes Ayman Nour’s Assets, Gives them to Mousa Moustafa,” IkhwanWeb, 19 February 2008. http://ikhwanweb.com/Article.asp?ID=16057&LevelID=1&SectionID=0 “Publishing ban on Nur,” Gulf Times, 21 May 2008. http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=219617&version=1&template_id=37&parent_id=17

  14. The exclusion of SMB candidates prompted the group to withdraw its permitted twenty candidates polls and boycott the elections. “Biyan al-Ikhwan bi sha’in al mawqif al naha’i min intikhabat al mahaliyat,” 7 April 2008. http://www.ikhwanonline.com/Article.asp?ArtID=36174&SecID=212 Accessed 7 April 2008.

  15. Ahmed Shelby, Adel Durra, and Ezza Masoud, “Al `Anf ``Yansaha” min Al Mahalla... Wa Al Aswat ``Taqat`a ‘’ Al Mahaliyat,” Al Masry Al Yawm, 9 April 2008. http://www.almasry-alyoum.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=100572 Accessed 9 April 2008.

  16. Exemplary works on Islamic movements and moderation include Wickham (2002), Schwedler (2006), and Bayat (2007).

  17. The recent political transition in Nepal—where Maoist insurgents helped push the monarch from power, then contested the elections that followed—may epitomize this scenario of democratization through popular, even radical pressure (Bhattarai 2008).

  18. The solution to the traditional commitment problem lay in binding one’s self to immoderate means and forcing the other party to back down (Schelling 1960: 122–131). The fictitious Soviet “Doomsday Machine,” of the tragicomedy Dr. Strangelove, illustrates Schelling’s concept of credible commitment. Once it is triggered by an American strike on Soviet soil, the machine’s nuclear counterattack sequence cannot be stopped.

References

  • Abou El-Magd, N. Egyptian government opponent convicted of forgery, sentenced to five years. Associated Press Newswires; 2005. December 24. http://global.factiva.com, Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • al-`Anani K. al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun fi Misr: al-Shaykshukha tasaari’ al-Zaman. Cairo: Dar al-Shurouq al-Dawliyya; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali AR. al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun: min Hassan al-Banna illa Mahdy Akef. Cairo: Al-Mahrousa lil Nashr; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angrist MP. Party systems and regime formation in the modern Middle East: explaining Turkish exceptionalism. Comp Polit. 2004;36:229–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashour O. Lions tamed? an inquiry into the causes of de-radicalization of Armed Islamist Movements: the case of the Egyptian Islamic Group. Middle East J. 2007;61:596–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayubi N. Over-stating the Arab State: politics and society in the Middle East. London: I.B. Tauris; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayat A. Making Islam democratic: social movements and the Post-Islamist turn. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellin E. The robustness of authoritarianism in the Middle East: exceptionalism in comparative perspective. Comp Polit. 2004;36:139–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bermeo N. Myths of moderation: confrontation and conflict during democratic transitions. Comp Polit. 1997;29:305–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattarai B. Maoist party heads to victory in Nepalese election. Financ Times. 2008;14:4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boix C. Democracy and redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratton M, van de Walle N. Democratic experiments in Africa: regime transitions in comparative perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1997.

  • Brooker P. Non-democratic regimes: theory, government, and politics. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 2000.

  • Brown NJ, Dunne M, Hamzawy A. Egypt’s controversial constitutional amendments. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush GW. “State of the Union Address,”. 2005. February 2, 2005. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050202-11.html. Accessed September 13, 2010.

  • Cook SA. The promise of pacts. J Democr. 2006;17:63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox GW. Making votes count: strategic coordination in the world’s electoral systems. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl RA. Polyarchy: participation and opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1971.

  • Djerejian EP. The US and the Middle East in a changing world. US Department of State Dispatch; 1992. June 8. http://global.factiva.com. Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • Egyptian National Committee. Report of the Egyptian National Committee on the 1995 parliamentary elections. Cairo: Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Ghobashy M. The metamorphosis of the Muslim Brothers. Int J Middle East Stud. 2005;37:373–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerges F. America and political Islam: clash of cultures of clash of interests? New York: Cambridge University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerges F. The end of the Islamist insurgency in Egypt?: Costs and prospects. Middle East J. 2000;54(4):592–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafez MM. Why Muslims rebel: repression and resistance in the Islamic world. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heshmat G. Mudhakarat Na’ib min Misr: Sharaf al-Niyaba `an al-Sh`ab wa `Azmat al-Tajruba. Al Mansoura: Dar al Wafaa; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heydemann S. Upgrading authoritarianism in the Arab world. Washington, D.C.: Saban Center of the Brookings Institution; 2007.

  • Hinnebusch R. The viability of authoritarian rule in the Middle East. Mafhoum Exclusive; 2004. http://www.mafhoum.com/press6/176P51hinnebusch.htm. Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • Howeidy F. Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimun: Min Al-Ta’dib illa Al-Isti’saal. 2007. Ikhwanonline, August 29, 2007. http://www.ikhwanonline.com/Article.asp?ArtID=30691&SecID=390, Accessed August 30, 2007.

  • Human Rights Watch. No justice for civilians in Egypt’s military court. 1999. November 11. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/1999/11/10/no-justice-civilians-egypts-military-court. Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • Human Rights Watch. Egypt: flawed military trials for Brotherhood leaders. 2007. June 5. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/06/04/egypt-flawed-military-trials-brotherhood-leaders. Accessed September 20, 2010

  • Huntington SP. The third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press; 1991.

  • Ibrahim SE. The changing face of Egypt’s Islamic activism. In: Ibrahim SE, editors. Egypt, Islam, and democracy: critical essays. Cairo: American University in Cairo; 1996. p. 69–79.

  • International Crisis Group. Islamism in North Africa II: Egypt’s opportunity. Brussels: International Crisis Group; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalyvas SN. Commitment problems in emerging democracies. Comp Polit. 2000;32:379–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamrava M. Non-democratic states and political liberalization in the Middle East: a structural analysis. Third World Q. 1998;19(1):63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karl TL. Dilemmas of democratization in Latin America. Comp Polit. 1990;23:1–21, (October).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassem M. In the guise of democracy: governance in contemporary Egypt. Ithaca: Ithaca Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassem M. Egyptian politics: the dynamics of authoritarian rule. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kepel G. Jihad: the trail of political Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kienle E. More than a response to Islamism: the political deliberalization of the 1990s. Middle East J. 1998;52(2):219–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer M. Coming to terms: fundamentalists or Islamists? Middle East Q. 2003;10(2):65–77.

  • Leiken RS, Brooke S. The moderate Muslim Brotherhood. Foreign Aff 2007;86(2):107–121, March/April.

  • Linz JJ, Stepan AC. Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1996.

  • Lockman Z. Contending visions of the Middle East: the history and politics of orientalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lord RH. A study in Catholic democracy. Cathol Hist Rev. 1923;9(1):30–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lust-Okar E. Structuring contestation in the Arab world: incumbents, opponents, and institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2005.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney J, Snyder R. Rethinking agency and structure in the study of regime change. Stud Comp Int Dev. 1999;34(2):3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makram-Ebeid M. Egypt’s 1995 elections: one step forward, two steps back? Middle East Pol. 1996;4:119–36.

  • Masoud T. Are they democrats? Does it matter? J Democr. 2008;19(3):9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustafa T. The struggle for constitutional power: law, politics, and economic development in Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mubarak H. al-Irhabiyun Qadimun: Dirasa Muqarana bayn Mouqif al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin wa Jama`at al-Jihad min Qadhiet al-Anf, 1928–1994. Cairo: Markaz al-Mahrousa lil-Nashr al-Khidmat al-Shaffiya; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell GA, Schmitter PC. Transitions from authoritarian rule: tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters AM, Moore PW. Beyond boom and bust: external rents, durable authoritarianism, and institutional adaptation in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Stud Comp Int Dev. 2009;44:256–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pripstein-Posusney M. Behind the ballot box: electoral engineering in the Arab world. Middle East Rep. 1998;209:12–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pripstein-Posusney M, Angrist MP. eds., Authoritarianism in the Middle East. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Press; 2005.

  • Przeworski A. Democracy and the market: political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabei AH. Al-musharaka al-siyasiya: muashirat kemiya wa keyfiya. In: Mustafa H, editor. Intikhabat Majlis al-Sh`ab 2000. Cairo: Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies; 2001. p. 163–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabei AH. Nita’ij intikhabat al-ria’isiya 2005. In: Rabei AH, editor. Al-t`adil al-dusturi wa intikhabat al-ria’sa 2005. Cairo: Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies; 2005. p. 395–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ries M. Egypt. In: Nohlen D, Krennerich M, Thibaut B, editors. Elections in Africa: a data handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999. p. 329–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross ML. Does oil hinder democracy? World Polit. 2001;53:325–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy O. The failure of political Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueschemeyer D, Stephens EH, Stephens JD. Capitalist development and democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1992.

  • Salah M. Waqai`a Sinawat Al-Jihad: Rahlat Al-Afghan Al-`Arab. Cairo: Khulud Li Al-Nashr; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schedler A, editor. Electoral authoritarianism: the dynamics of unfree competition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner; 2006.

  • Schelling TC. An essay on bargaining. Am Econ Rev. 1956;46(3):281–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling TC. The strategy of conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlumberger O, editor. Debating Arab authoritarianism: dynamics and durability in nondemocratic regimes. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwedler J. Faith in moderation: Islamist parties in Jordan and Yemen. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp JM. Egypt: background and U.S. relations. CRS Report. 2009; RL33003. March 26.

  • Shehata S, Stacher J. The Brotherhood goes to parliament. Middle East Rep. 2006;240:32–39, Fall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shehata S, Stacher J. Boxing in the Brothers. Middle East Report Online. 2007. August 8. http://www.merip.org/mero/mero080807.html. Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • Singerman D. The siege of Imbaba, Egypt’s internal ‘other’, and the criminalization of politics. In: Singerman D, editor. Cairo contested: governance, urban space, and global modernity. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press; 2009. p. 111–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slackman M. Mubarak Foe, Bravado Gone, Feels Victimized by Smears After Second-Place Finish. NY Times. 2005; October 19. http://global.factiva.com. Accessed September 20, 2010.

  • Snyder R. Paths out of Sultanistic regimes: combining structural and voluntarist perspectives. In: Chehabi HE, Linz JJ, editors. Sultanistic regimes. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1998. p. 49–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacher J. Post-Islamist rumblings in Egypt: the emergence of the Wasat party. Middle East J. 2002;56(3):415–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stepan, A, Robertson G. An ‘Arab’ more than ‘Muslim’ electoral gap. J Democr. 2004;14:30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Telhami S. America in Arab eyes. Survival. 2007;49:107–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The World Bank Group. WDI online. 2008. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,,contentMDK:20535285~menuPK:1192694~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175~theSitePK:239419,00.html Accessed 10 March 2008.

  • United Nations. Human Development Reports 2007/2008. 2008. http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/147.html. Accessed 10 March 2008.

  • Waterbury J. Democracy without democrats?: The potential for political liberalization in the Middle East. In: Salamé G, editor. Democracy without democrats? The renewal of politics in the Muslim world. London: I.B. Tauris; 1994. p. 23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickham CR. Mobilizing Islam: religion, activism, and political change in Egypt. New York: Columbia University Press; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickham C. The path to moderation: strategy and learning in the formation of Egypt’s Wasat party. Comp Polit. 2004;36:205–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood EJ. An insurgent path to democracy: popular mobilization, economic interests, and regime transition in South Africa and El Salvador. Comp Polit Stud. 2001;34(8):862–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yashar D. Demanding democracy: reform and reaction in Costa Rica and Guatemala, 1870s–1950s. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yom S. Iron fists in silk gloves: building political regimes in the Middle East. Dissertation in the Department of Government, Harvard University; 2009.

  • Zaki M. Civil society & democratization in Egypt, 1981–1994. Cairo: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The author thanks Joel Beinin, Lisa Blaydes, Carles Boix, Jennifer Gandhi, Barbara Geddes, Samer Shehata, Amr El-Shobaki, Joshua Stacher, Milan Svolik, Carrie Wickham, fellow conferees at “Islamists and Democrats” in Cairo, Egypt, workshop participants at “Dictatorships: Their Governance and Social Consequences,” in Princeton, New Jersey, and two anonymous readers at SCID for their comments on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A1800, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Jason Brownlee

Authors
  1. Jason Brownlee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason Brownlee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brownlee, J. Unrequited Moderation: Credible Commitments and State Repression in Egypt. St Comp Int Dev 45, 468–489 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-010-9073-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-010-9073-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation