• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "H. A. Hellyer"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Arab Awakening"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "North Africa",
    "Egypt"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Hosni Mubarak is Dead, and His Downfall is His Legacy

Mubarak made his name in Egypt as a military man. As younger Egyptians look back on the past decade, Mubarak won’t be a hero to their generation.

Link Copied
By H. A. Hellyer
Published on Feb 25, 2020
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

Source: Foreign Policy

One of modern Egypt’s most famous preachers was Sheikh Muhammad Metwalli al-Sharawi, who died in 1998 at the age of 87. He was popular in the days before social media even existed—yet a clip of his continues to be seen online more than 20 years after his death. It’s a line he delivered to former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak at the height of the latter’s popularity—a line often touted as an example of a scholar speaking truth to power. Sharawi declared to Mubarak: “If you are our fate, then may God grant you success. And if we are your fate, then may God help you handle it.”

On Feb. 25, Mubarak went to his fate, dying in Cairo at the age of 91. And despite Sharawi’s warning, Mubarak didn’t handle his fate with the Egyptian people, and his legacy will always be their uprising against him.

Mubarak made his name in Egypt as a military man, first training at the Military Academy and then the Air Force Academy, an institution he would eventually lead, becoming commander of the Air Force in 1972. He then became vice president under then-Egyptian President Anwar Sadat a few years later—and rose to the top office not out of deft political maneuvering but because his boss was assassinated.

That assassination happened right in front of Mubarak’s eyes; Sadat was killed by an extremist Islamist while Mubarak was sitting next to him. That experience defined Mubarak’s worldview going forward: an emphasis on security and a narrow interpretation of what that meant. In a country that was beset by extremist Islamist movements in the 1980s and 1990s, Mubarak’s consolidation of his authority went largely unopposed, and he created a regime on that basis. Egypt’s security apparatus, as scholars like Tarek Masoud and Hazem Kandil point out, grew substantially during Mubarak’s reign, far more than the country’s population growth warranted.

But autocratic rule and the deep securitization of the state were of secondary consideration to Mubarak’s international partners, particularly in the West. Few outside of Egypt considered the medium- to long-term repercussions of a regime that was built on repression of social and political grievances. Nor did many out of the country recognize that an economic system that enfranchised a tiny slice of the population in the elite, buttressed by corruption, while the vast majority of Egyptians continued to be poor, inevitably would lead to a backlash of some sort or another.

Few outside of Egypt considered the medium- to long-term repercussions of a regime that was built on repression of social and political grievances.

More important to Western capitals was Mubarak’s willingness to uphold the peace treaty with Israel and Cairo’s pivoting away from Moscow and into the Western sphere of influence. When a revolutionary uprising finally came in 2011, many Western leaders denied what was staring them right in the face: that Mubarak’s rule had been untenable for many years and, if anything, the uprising was an escape valve to save the Egyptian state from complete and utter destruction.

As Egypt entered the 21st century, the regime that Mubarak built became more and more strained under the surface. The radical Islamist extremists were no longer the threat they had been in the ’80s and ’90s, and citizens wanted more access to the nation’s wealth and to be given more liberty. But the Mubarak regime wanted neither; a narrow securitization, coupled with an economic system that served only the upper echelons—betraying any notion of a trickle-down effect—meant that the system’s cracking was a matter of time.

Mubarak’s regime implemented an emergency law, which severely restricted Egyptian civil society in the name of security. For years on end, those of all political stripes—political Islamists, non-Islamist leftists, and others—were silenced or punished. The regime was built on autocracy, corruption, cronyism, and the use of 20th-century state institutions to stifle dissent.

The 2011 uprising was spontaneous—one that happened as the result of many years of neglect and the failing of the Egyptian state to give a sense of dignity to scores of Egyptians.

If one man is responsible for that, it is Mubarak. It was he and his regime that allowed an untenable situation to fester; it was he and his regime that failed to tackle the country’s corruption, cronyism, and inequality when they had the chance to do so, multiple times over 30 years; it was he and his regime that chose to respond to the protesters with brute force over the 18 days of the 2011 uprising. And it was thus he who precipitated his own downfall. That, indeed, is his legacy.

The 2011 uprising was spontaneous—one that happened as the result of many years of neglect and the failing of the Egyptian state to give a sense of dignity to scores of Egyptians.

If one man is responsible for that, it is Mubarak. It was he and his regime that allowed an untenable situation to fester; it was he and his regime that failed to tackle the country’s corruption, cronyism, and inequality when they had the chance to do so, multiple times over 30 years; it was he and his regime that chose to respond to the protesters with brute force over the 18 days of the 2011 uprising. And it was thus he who precipitated his own downfall. That, indeed, is his legacy.

I was in Tahrir Square on the night of Feb. 11, 2011. I remember the joy of the people that night when his departure was finally confirmed. “Raise your head up—you’re Egyptian!” I remember hearing the crowd chant. On the one hand, it was electrifying to see Egyptians so energized by the prospect of an alternative future. And on the other, it was an unfinished revolution because the uprising hadn’t managed to get the state and the regime to restructure and hence there was little to no accountability for the ousted leader himself.

His downfall wasn’t the downfall of the regime. And in that regard, the 2011 revolutionary uprising was successful as an uprising but not as a revolution. The revolution was unfinished and thus undone.

Nine years later, as younger Egyptians look back on the past decade, Mubarak won’t be a hero to their generation. Rather, the heroes of their generation are those who revolted against him—and their dream of building a new Egypt of possibility is, as yet, unrealized.

This article was originally published by Foreign Policy.

About the Author

H. A. Hellyer

Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program

Dr. H.A. Hellyer was a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He serves as a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies in London, and as a Cambridge University fellow.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    The Sinwar Delusion

      H. A. Hellyer

  • Commentary
    Why Gaza Forces Europe to Act

      H. A. Hellyer

H. A. Hellyer
Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program
H. A. Hellyer
Political ReformForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastNorth AfricaEgypt

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Moldova Floats a New Approach to Its Transnistria Conundrum

    Moldova’s reintegration plan was drawn up to demonstrate to Brussels that Chișinău is serious about the Transnistria issue—and to get the West to react.

      Vladimir Solovyov

  • A Black man pulls a trolley. He is small in the bottom center of the frame; in the background are stacks of large, colorful shipping containers and the parts of a large crane or similar piece of equipment.
    Article
    Africa’s Global Economic Edge: Advancing Strategic Sectors

    In key sectors such as critical minerals, specialty agriculture, and fintech, Africa can become a global powerhouse by investing more in manufacturing, value-add, and scaling.

      • Kholofelo Kugler

      Kholofelo Kugler, Georgia Schaefer-Brown

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Iran Rewrites Its War Strategy

    In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.

      Michael Young

  • apan's 8,900-ton Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ship Oosumi leaves Muroran port escorted by the 4,550-ton destroyer Murasame bound for Kuwait February 20, 2004 in Muroran, Japan.
    Article
    Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic Reality

    Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

  • Article
    Kenya’s Health Deal Is a Stress Test for the America First Global Health Strategy

    U.S. agreements must contend with national data protection laws to make durable foreign policy instruments.

      • A Black woman with long hair wears a black blazer

      Jane Munga, Rose Mosero

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.