The purpose of this paper is to understand to the extent strong-weak state dichotomy reinforces coercive power over legitimacy. The paper proposes an analytical perspective to assess what is described as a strong state as opposite to a failed or fragile state. It suggests that, in some empirical cases, the notion of strong state does not necessarily reflect legitimacy but rather, often times, oppression under the claim of maintaining stability and order amongst the citizens. The paper uses Ronald Paris’s theory on Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation (IBL) as one example of liberal peace literature discourse that supports state-centrism. It criticises Paris’s argument of institutionalisation as a mean towards a stable and peaceful state, differentiating between the stability of a state versus the stability of a regime. As an empirical evidence, the paper sheds light on the current status of Egypt under President’s Al-Sisi rule as a case study of how institutionalism reinforces coercion and violence.
The field of International Relations has contributed to the understanding of the notions of strong and weak states especially as an element of peacekeeping on both the intrastate and interstate levels. Strong-weak states literature has been focusing on institutions-building as an indicator for the level of autonomy and good governance the state performs. War-shattered states and Third World countries are presumed to be mostly fragile, due to their lack of efficient institutions that regulate the political, social and economic lives of the citizens. Attempting to address such issue, over the past years the liberal discourse has been developing several models to help build strong states by establishing powerful institutions in those countries through different modes of assistance. One of those models is the Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation developed by Ronald Paris which argues that building strong state institutions is vital for maintaining peace before bringing in democracy.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Stability at All Costs: The Case of Egypt in Al-Sisi Era
- Strong States and Weak States in IR
- The Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation Model: A State-Centric Approach
- The Egyptian State: A Case Study of Institutionalism and Coercion
- The Egyptian State under Al-Sisi: Stability at All Costs
- Conclusion
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This paper investigates the relationship between state strength, legitimacy, and coercion, using the case of Egypt under President Al-Sisi's rule. It challenges the prevailing liberal peacebuilding discourse, particularly the Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation (IBL) model, arguing that it can lead to the consolidation of authoritarianism rather than a peaceful and inclusive state. By examining Egypt's current situation, the paper aims to demonstrate how institutionalism can reinforce state-society relationships of coercion and violence.
- Strong-weak state dichotomy and its impact on legitimacy
- Critique of the Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation (IBL) model
- The relationship between state building, stability, and coercion
- The role of institutions in promoting peace and order
- The case study of Egypt under Al-Sisi's rule
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
- The paper starts by reviewing the international relations (IR) literature on strong and weak states, highlighting the prevailing focus on state institutions as indicators of stability and legitimacy. It then introduces Ronald Paris's IBL model as a prominent example of liberal peacebuilding theory advocating for institutional strengthening as a precursor to democratization.
- The paper then examines the Egyptian state-building framework in light of the IBL model, analyzing how the current regime of President Al-Sisi has implemented institutional reforms. It argues that these reforms have resulted in the consolidation of an authoritarian state, rather than a peaceful and inclusive one. The paper suggests that the IBL model, despite its stated goal of promoting peace and order, can inadvertently contribute to a state-society relationship characterized by coercion and violence.
- The paper delves deeper into the Egyptian case, focusing on the specific policies and practices implemented by the Al-Sisi regime that demonstrate the prioritization of stability over legitimacy. This includes measures such as the suppression of dissent, the curtailment of civil liberties, and the use of force to maintain order. The paper aims to show how these actions, while seemingly intended to create a stable state, ultimately undermine the legitimacy of the regime and contribute to a cycle of violence and conflict.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
The paper focuses on the key concepts of strong and weak states, state building, legitimacy, coercion, institutionalism, liberal peacebuilding, the Institutionalisation Before Liberalisation (IBL) model, authoritarianism, and the case study of Egypt under President Al-Sisi's rule. It explores the intersection of these themes and argues that the prioritization of stability over legitimacy in state-building practices can have detrimental consequences for peace and order.
- Citation du texte
- Radwa El Sekhily (Auteur), 2019, Stability at All Costs. The Case of Egypt in Al-Sisi Era, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/496935
