• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Amr Hamzawy",
    "Mohammed Herzallah"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Egypt"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

Which path will the Brotherhood choose?

In view of the wave of social unrest and economic uncertainty debilitating Egyptian society today - as demonstrated by the latest rounds of violence between workers and security forces in the industrial city of Mehallah - the continued suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood is certain to aggravate conditions and lead to further instability in Egypt.

Link Copied
By Amr Hamzawy and Mohammed Herzallah
Published on Apr 18, 2008

Source: The Daily Star

On April 8, Egypt held its local council elections after a two-year postponement. Alleging that the results of the elections were largely predetermined by the regime, the Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition force in the country, announced on April 6 that it would be boycotting the elections. The Islamist movement also stepped up its confrontational rhetoric and called on all Egyptians to join the boycott. Mehdi Akef, the general guide of the Brotherhood, warned that the government's actions could trigger violence - although he was careful to emphasize his group's commitment to peaceful activism. Other leading figures in the Islamist movement echoed Akef's sentiment.

To preclude the opposition from achieving meaningful gains in the local elections, the Egyptian regime prevented the greatest number of opposition candidates from registering and running for local office. Around 1,000 opposition activists were arrested, primarily from the Muslim Brotherhood. Government administrators also blocked the registration of opposition candidates for local council seats. Of the more than 5,000 potential Brotherhood candidates, less than 500 were able to submit their candidacy papers. In the end, only around two dozen candidates affiliated with the Brotherhood were approved by the authorities. The remaining opposition groups only managed to put 1,000 candidates on the final lists.

The ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), on the other hand, had over 53,000 registered candidates for the 52,000 seats up for grabs. As expected, the elections ended with a sweeping 95 percent victory for the NDP.

Local councils have traditionally been dominated by members of the NDP and have little power and no direct impact on the political process. Nevertheless, the councils have acquired a slender measure of significance following recent constitutional amendments that stipulated that future independent presidential candidates (in other words those who are not members of registered political parties) must be sponsored by at least 140 local representatives. The Muslim Brotherhood was seen as the one movement most capable of launching a successful bid for Egypt's 2011 presidential election. To Egyptian authorities, this prospect presented a challenge and resulted in the postponement of local elections twice since 2006. This also explains why repressive methods have been progressively assuming a larger role in the regime's Brotherhood-containment policies.
 

In recent years, the Muslim Brotherhood has been carving out a substantial presence in Egypt's political order. It won approximately 20 percent of parliamentary seats in the 2005 legislative election. In spite of the limited impact of the Brotherhood's parliamentary activities, the movement's active political involvement has regularly tested the regime's grip on power.

The Brotherhood's initial response to violations in the conduct of local elections was to file thousands of lawsuits to reinstate its candidates. A majority of court decisions affirmed the movement's claims, but the government refused to respect the verdicts. Subsequently, the Brotherhood's commitment to legal recourse began to waver. Escalations in street protests against the regime led to further arrests, and were followed by the movement's decision to boycott the local elections.

In retrospect, the conflagration over local elections has chipped away at the agenda of those within the Islamist movement who favor pursuing its goals through democratic means. The Muslim Brotherhood's gains in the 2005 elections helped moderates and pragmatists within the movement - who are keen on advancing reforms through the legal political process - gain more traction in devising the Brotherhood's policies.

In view of the wave of social unrest and economic uncertainty debilitating Egyptian society today - as demonstrated by the latest rounds of violence between workers and security forces in the industrial city of Mehallah - the continued suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood is certain to aggravate conditions and lead to further instability in Egypt. Conservative leaders within the Brotherhood, who have traditionally been skeptical about political participation, are likely to accumulate more influence. Consequently, they could impel the movement to reconsider legal participation. This would be terribly regrettable for the country as a whole.


Amr Hamzawy is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Mohammed J. Herzallah is a research fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. They wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.

About the Authors

Amr Hamzawy

Director, Middle East Program

Amr Hamzawy is a senior fellow and the director of the Carnegie Middle East Program. His research and writings focus on Egypt’s and other middle powers’ involvement in regional security in the Middle East, particularly through collective diplomacy and multilateral conflict resolution

Mohammed Herzallah

Former Junior Fellow, Middle East

Authors

Amr Hamzawy
Director, Middle East Program
Amr Hamzawy
Mohammed Herzallah
Former Junior Fellow, Middle East
Political ReformMiddle EastEgypt

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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Frustration With Armenia’s Pashinyan Enough to Bring the Pro-Russia Opposition to Power?

    It’s true that many Armenians would vote for anyone just to be rid of Pashinyan, whom they blame for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh, but the pro-Russia opposition is unlikely to be able to channel that frustration into an electoral victory.

      Mikayel Zolyan

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for Russia

    Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.

      Ruslan Suleymanov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    After Ilia II: What Will a New Patriarch Mean for Georgia?

    The front-runner to succeed Ilia II, Metropolitan Shio, is prone to harsh anti-Western rhetoric and frequent criticism of “liberal ideologies” that he claims threaten the Georgian state. This raises fears that under his leadership the Georgian Orthodox Church will lose its unifying role and become an instrument of ultraconservative ideology.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Tokayev’s New Constitution Is a Bet on Stability—At Freedom’s Expense

    Kazakhstan’s new constitution is an embodiment of the ruling elite’s fears and a self-serving attempt to preserve the status quo while they still can.

      Serik Beysembaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Kremlin Is Destroying Its Own System of Coerced Voting

    The use of technology to mobilize Russians to vote—a system tied to the relative material well-being of the electorate, its high dependence on the state, and a far-reaching system of digital control—is breaking down.

      Andrey Pertsev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.