The failed revolution: Egypt's continuing democratic crisis

By Joe Said

In the early 2010s, a widespread movement challenged the authoritarian rule of multiple Middle Eastern and North African countries. The Arab Spring had a significant and lasting impact on many countries, some for better; many for worse. Tunisia overthrew the regime and has established widespread reform; Morocco did not stage a revolution, yet protests were able to pressure the government into implementing constitutional and political reforms.

And then, there's Egypt. 

Egypt had one of the most significant outcomes of the Arab Spring; similar to Tunisia, Egypt overthrew an authoritarian regime led by Hosni Mubarak, and while they had short-term gains in the form of Mubarak being removed and having a competitive presidential election, the positives were short-lived.

On 24 June 2012, over a year after Mubarak was removed, Mohamed Morsi was elected the fifth president of Egypt. Whilst this was a positive outcome of the Arab Spring, with an authoritarian regime transitioning into a democratic leader who had to compete and campaign for his premiership, this did not last long, as there were signs of Morsi attempting to consolidate his power more permanently.

There were many issues under Morsi’s tenure. Even at the beginning, he was only elected with 51% of the votes and only had a small majority. The Sociological complexity of Egypt at the time also cannot be understated; the country was divided into many factions, including Islamists, liberals, secularists, Christians and supporters of the old regime. Instead of trying to create a social coalition, Morsi and his government became increasingly aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist socio-political movement in Egypt that is currently heavily suppressed in the country. This created paranoia from the other groups that one group would dominate the new political set up. Moreover, possibly the most damning action of Morsi’s presidency was the November 2012 constitutional declaration. This constitution effectively placed Morsi’s decisions above judiciary challenge for a short period of time; a significant act of democratic backsliding that was widely interpreted to be an attempt to consolidate power.

Starting in June 2013, Egyptians staged mass protests against Morsi. When compared to the Arab Spring protests, it marks the beginning of Egypt’s continuous democratic crisis. On both occasions, there were mass protests against the government, and it shows a cycle that will continue in the future: action that is perceived to create change, which reverts to what it was before. These protests and Morsi’s unpopularity led to the most significant event in Egyptian politics since the Arab Spring. On 1 July 2013, the Egyptian military lead by the defence minister Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, issued Morsi a 48-hour ultimatum to resolve the broad political crisis. On 2 July, Morsi publicly rejected the demands, and, on the 3^rd, Morsi was removed by a coup d’etat. Subsequently, after a year-long interim period, Sisi became the 6^th president of Egypt and is still in power today. 

When compared to the Arab Spring protests, it marks the beginning of Egypt’s continuous democratic crisis.

Sisi immediately consolidated power by introducing measures that increased military jurisdiction over civilians, and in 2019, he passed the most significant consolidating act, making himself the veto-wielding head of the Supreme Council for Judicial Bodies and Authorities. This act gave him greater control over judicial appointments and additionally allowed him to run for another term whilst also further expanding the circumstances in which civilians can fall under military jurisdiction.

It is not a surprise then that as of 2026 Freedom House has given Egypt a global freedom score of 18/100 classing it as ‘not free’.

So, this begs the question: why did Egypt gain so little long-term democratic reform after the Arab Spring, whilst countries like Tunisia and Morocco followed vastly different political trajectories?

There is no simple and explicit answer, as many factors contribute to the continued authoritarian rule. Even under Mubarak, the military was deeply embedded in politics, and when a power vacuum arose, the military was in a strong position to take power. Furthermore, the political factions in Egypt provided a significant challenge since Mubarak was removed, creating opportunities, while in Tunisia they eventually compromised and negotiated. Finally, possibly the most significant reason the aftermath of the Arab Spring was different between the states was because of Egypt’s strong, ingrained power structures that were never fully dissolved, while Morocco did not need to dissolve these political structures. Moreover, Tunisia had a less entrenched political structure which, when overthrown, gave it stronger mechanisms to transition from authoritarianism to democracy, even if it experienced democratic backsliding.

Image: Flickr