In my opinion, Egypt’s main problem is neither terrorism nor the opposition groups; it is economic woes that pose a threat to the stability of this country. Despite introducing various economic reforms even in the past, the Egyptian economy is yet to realize its true potential.
It is the kind of problem that can shake the pillars of any state and create chaos perhaps even more than any other external or internal enemy. Economy is also the only challenge that can be overcome as compared to other challenges staring Egypt in the face. It is an important battle but the situation can be improved. The government has spoken about a new phase of development and started its era with promises and has already embarked on this mission by taking practical steps.
We believe in Egypt because it has a huge market. It’s the second biggest economy in Africa after Nigeria. Yet, global companies are losing confidence in Egypt due to political propaganda, bureaucracy’s inability to open up or due to restraints imposed on the few investors, who have taken the risk by going to work in Egypt.
This does not diminish the accomplishments made so far. The new Suez Canal was completed in one year. It was a massive construction project and it was an important test for the government — a test it passed with flying colors. The second question is: Does the government have new ideas?
All Egyptian governments have executed multiple projects but none of them proposed a plan to develop the country’s economy on strong foundations. All we’ve had for decades are promises for development.
We must exclude the first experience of change led by late President Anwar Al-Sadat when he opened the economy as part of a political change following the Camp David agreement. Sadat was the first to adopt this approach. Socialist countries, mainly the Soviet Union, and the socialist eastern European countries followed suit.
Egypt’s consecutive governments did not complete this journey of reform and development, unlike Poland, Bulgaria and other such countries. What slowed down this path of development is that Cairo focused on confronting political challenges. Former President Hosni Mubarak developed an ambitious reform transition plan; however, it deviated from its path as a result of political and administrative tussles.
Mubarak focused on the game of political balances with the opposition in the street and with the political parties within the regime and leaders in governance. And so years passed until the government found itself incapable of fulfilling people’s basic needs. Meanwhile, the political opposition was waiting to seize the moment for change and the moment came in 2011.
President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s era started with the talk of development, change and prosperity. This was the third such occasion since the end of the socialist economic system in the 1970s. Egypt promised to attract international investments and this first required reforming legislations as well as developing a comprehensive economic plan that acts as a road map.
Egypt can do better with its huge resources and capabilities but we fear that the state’s rivals will succeed at distracting its attention and keeping it occupied with political challenges. We know that the Egyptian opposition, regional struggles and administrative disputes are enough to consume the government’s energy and distract it from the more important promises. We cannot, however, underestimate the extent of harm, which the opposition has caused to the country’s economy.
Tourism, which is one of the most important financial resources, has declined by 66 percent during the first quarter this year. There is no doubt that this has been due to terrorism. Oil price drop also affects Egypt, as it has oil and depends on selling the commodity in return for hard currency. Egyptian laborers who work in oil-rich countries also depend on it.
Egypt’s situation will continue to be difficult if it doesn’t implement reforms, which former governments have avoided. The most important step will be modernizing legislations, which are the causes behind investor aversion. Egypt’s economic success will make the country better for its domestic constituents and make it a strong and influential state.
It is the kind of problem that can shake the pillars of any state and create chaos perhaps even more than any other external or internal enemy. Economy is also the only challenge that can be overcome as compared to other challenges staring Egypt in the face. It is an important battle but the situation can be improved. The government has spoken about a new phase of development and started its era with promises and has already embarked on this mission by taking practical steps.
We believe in Egypt because it has a huge market. It’s the second biggest economy in Africa after Nigeria. Yet, global companies are losing confidence in Egypt due to political propaganda, bureaucracy’s inability to open up or due to restraints imposed on the few investors, who have taken the risk by going to work in Egypt.
This does not diminish the accomplishments made so far. The new Suez Canal was completed in one year. It was a massive construction project and it was an important test for the government — a test it passed with flying colors. The second question is: Does the government have new ideas?
All Egyptian governments have executed multiple projects but none of them proposed a plan to develop the country’s economy on strong foundations. All we’ve had for decades are promises for development.
We must exclude the first experience of change led by late President Anwar Al-Sadat when he opened the economy as part of a political change following the Camp David agreement. Sadat was the first to adopt this approach. Socialist countries, mainly the Soviet Union, and the socialist eastern European countries followed suit.
Egypt’s consecutive governments did not complete this journey of reform and development, unlike Poland, Bulgaria and other such countries. What slowed down this path of development is that Cairo focused on confronting political challenges. Former President Hosni Mubarak developed an ambitious reform transition plan; however, it deviated from its path as a result of political and administrative tussles.
Mubarak focused on the game of political balances with the opposition in the street and with the political parties within the regime and leaders in governance. And so years passed until the government found itself incapable of fulfilling people’s basic needs. Meanwhile, the political opposition was waiting to seize the moment for change and the moment came in 2011.
President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s era started with the talk of development, change and prosperity. This was the third such occasion since the end of the socialist economic system in the 1970s. Egypt promised to attract international investments and this first required reforming legislations as well as developing a comprehensive economic plan that acts as a road map.
Egypt can do better with its huge resources and capabilities but we fear that the state’s rivals will succeed at distracting its attention and keeping it occupied with political challenges. We know that the Egyptian opposition, regional struggles and administrative disputes are enough to consume the government’s energy and distract it from the more important promises. We cannot, however, underestimate the extent of harm, which the opposition has caused to the country’s economy.
Tourism, which is one of the most important financial resources, has declined by 66 percent during the first quarter this year. There is no doubt that this has been due to terrorism. Oil price drop also affects Egypt, as it has oil and depends on selling the commodity in return for hard currency. Egyptian laborers who work in oil-rich countries also depend on it.
Egypt’s situation will continue to be difficult if it doesn’t implement reforms, which former governments have avoided. The most important step will be modernizing legislations, which are the causes behind investor aversion. Egypt’s economic success will make the country better for its domestic constituents and make it a strong and influential state.
