چکیده:
The Egyptian army has changed the course of this country's political history two times. First, military intervention led to the 1952 revolution and the overthrow of King Farouk, who was the king of this country; again, in July 3rd i.e. sixty-one years later it led to the fall of Mohamed Morsi. This paper seeks to explore the cause of this major event by using historical-analytic method. The results suggest that considering the historical-political role of the Egyptian army in the process of state formation and nation building in the country and that all leaders of Egypt except Mohamed Morsi have had military backgrounds, it can be said that stratocracy has always been ruled in Egypt except for Morci's short era. Yet, the Egyptian army's success in providing stability and peace in the period after the coup against Morsi and its future position in the political arena will largely depend on the way they interact with activists in the Egypt's internal scene such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the way they balance their relations with external powers.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The research results show that given the historical-political role of the Egyptian army in the state-building process in this country and the fact that all Egyptian leaders, with the exception of Mohamed Morsi, have military backgrounds, it can be claimed that in Egypt, with the exception of Morsi's short period, the rule of the military has always been dominant; however, the success of the Egyptian army in providing stability and peace in the post-coup period and its future position on the political scene will largely depend on how it interacts with active groups in the domestic scene of Egypt, including the Muslim Brotherhood, and how it establishes a balance in relations with foreign powers.
After the war with Israel, the Egyptian army, in the eyes of the people, transformed into the guardian of the territory and national identity against potential Israeli aggression, because at that historical juncture, the Arab world, and especially Egypt, defined its national identity within the framework of hostility toward the identity of Zionism and Israel; based on this, the Nasser government considered a prominent political role for the army within the ruling class and provided the arena for the army's control over the means of production; furthermore, after 1952, the army introduced itself as an anti-colonial force, and military leaders like Nasser explained that the grounds for the 1952 coup should first be sought in the presence of Britain in Egypt and also in the evident corruption of the monarchy; these anti-colonial credentials and the accompanying nationalist rhetoric, which focused on industrial development, caused the army to gain a massive amount of legitimacy among the people (Salem, 2013:p2).
(
, 
, 
)
