Part 10. Gamal Abdul Nasser and Non-Alignment

One of the most prominent figures in resisting imperial control was Egypt’s president, Gamal ‘Abdul Nasser. He was at the forefront of the worldwide movement to resist the domination of the superpowers, called non-Alignment, which denied alliance with either the U.S.’s Containment Policy, or the Soviet Union’s systems of influence. He gained renown at the international conference on the subject in Bandung, in 1955, as a leader in non-Alignment and postcolonial sovereignty.

Key Figure: Gamal ‘Abdul Nasser:

Nasser was incredibly popular as he represented Egyptian national identity and independence in many ways. Firstly, because of his role in the revolution of 1952 that overthrew the European-backed monarchy but also because he was the first Egyptian to rule Egypt since the time of the Pharoahs, and his humble village background gave him additional authenticity. His credibility was further strengthened when he nationalized the Suez Canal, standing up to both Israel and European powers. Even when Egypt lost the war to Israel in 1967, and lost the Sinai Peninsula, he continued to be considered a hero.

As a way to implement this ideology in his country, and bolster regional solidarity, he developed pan-Arabism to counter the pressures from the West and the Soviets. It was an aspect of Arab socialism that was also gaining traction among Arab intellectuals. Syria and Egypt were united briefly under this policy, and his direction. His main policies were pan-Arabism, and Positive Neutrality. The latter was his non-alignment strategy, neutrality without indifference. The government reserves the right to be involved in world affairs without taking sides, and to intervene on issues deemed appropriate.

Nasser’s popularity extended beyond the borders of his own country, mostly because the discontent felt in Egypt also existed in other Arab nations during the 1950s and 1960s.  Cleveland and Bunton write that “throughout the 1950s, a wave of coups and counter-coups swept the eastern Arab world as a new generation of impatient military officers cast aside the previous order and tried to construct another” (Cleveland and Bunton, A History of the Modern Middle East Sixth Edition, 307).  Such coups struck in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, among others.  In addition, a brief civil war took place in Lebanon, and the government of Jordan seemed to totter during this period.  However, rather than leading to the pan-Arab unity that Nasser aspired to, this wave of instability led to a marked division within the Arab world between the socialist regimes inspired by Nasser and the pro-Western regimes in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Lebanon.  This is a period that has been referred to as the “Arab Cold War,” a term that highlights the divisions within the region and the associated political alignments with either the Soviet Union or the United States.

Egypt After Nasser

Egyptian politics made an abrupt about face following Nasser’s death in 1970.  Although an original member of the “Free Officers” who overthrew the monarchy in 1952, and a close associate of former Egyptian president Nasser, the new president Anwar Sadat broke significantly from the policies of his predecessor.  Whereas Nasser had proclaimed himself to be the leader of the Arab Nationalist movement and had actively involved his country in the affairs of the surrounding Arab states, Sadat pursued an “Egypt first” policy that wound up isolating Egypt from its neighbors.  Although Nasser had promoted a policy of “Arab Socialism” which resulted in state centralization of the economy and a bloated bureaucracy, Sadat implemented a policy that he referred to as Infitah (opening), which promoted free market values and international investment in the Egyptian economy.  While Nasser’s foreign policy approach had led him to an alliance with the Soviet Union and vocal opposition to the state of Israel, Sadat’s determination to ally with the United States led him to eventually make peace with Israel.  Nasser’s activist regime led to an unplanned and disastrous confrontation with Israel in the Six Day War, whereas Sadat fought a relatively successful war in 1973 in order to pursue his objectives of achieving a truce with Israel.  Nasser had attempted to crush the Islamist movement by imprisoning and executing leaders of the Muslim Brothers while loudly proclaiming that his secularist policies were in line with true Islamic principles.  In contrast, Sadat freed the Muslim Brothers from prison, and encouraged them to promote their cause on university campuses throughout Egypt, all in the hope that they would undermine the position of the socialists, who he viewed as the real threat to his authority.

Ironically, it was the Islamists who would bring a violent end to the reign of Anwar Sadat, in a startlingly bold assassination carried out at a military parade on October 6, 1981.  Arthur Goldschmidt Jr. summarizes the Sadat era by describing the president as a man who “surprised almost everybody with his ability to outmaneuver his rivals” and who “deservedly received the 1978 Nobel Peace Prize” for his efforts in securing the Camp David Peace Accords, the longest lasting treaty between Israel and an Arab state (Goldschmidt, A Concise History of the Middle East, 2016, 314).

Following the assassination of Anwar Sadat, the regime of Hosni Mubarak appeared at first to promote a more democratic system than its predecessors, but eventually settled into a conservative and unimaginative approach to governance.  “As a result,” Cleveland and Bunton write, “Egypt drifted into political and economic paralysis” (Cleveland and Bunton, A History of the Modern Middle East Sixth Edition, 398).  The alliances with Israel and the United States, initiated by Sadat, were maintained, and the substantial economic assistance that Egypt received from the U.S. served to keep the government afloat in difficult times.  However, Islamist opposition would contest the authority of the government.