Can Military Governments be a good thing (for a while)?

[TheCurmudgeon]

On the BBC News yesterday, Professor Rosemary Hollis was interviewed and remarked that 33% of the Egyptian economy is owned by the military.

This offers another interesting perspective. If the major problems in the company are economic and if the military has experience in business, does this not provide another argument for the military?

[davidbfpo]

Two contrasting, but similar commentaries. The first is by a Conservative MEP, Daniel Hannan and has some telling passages, like this:

There is no such thing as a good coup, only bad coups and worse coups. All military regimes, in time, become tawdry and self-serving. Whatever intentions the army officers begin with, they end up as petty tyrants. An elected ruler is kept in check by the knowledge that he can be fired. Take that knowledge away and, however pure his motives, he will end up arranging the affairs of state around his personal convenience.

Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ntentions.html

A BBC Newsnight commentary, four minutes or so, which gives a very quick overview of 'Egypt crisis: Does political Islam have a future?':http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23736446

[davidbfpo]

This offers another interesting perspective. If the major problems in the company are economic and if the military has experience in business, does this not provide another argument for the military?

Somehow I have m' doubts that a serving or retired Egyptian soldier has excellent commercial acumen, more likely via the state apparatus he'd have an "insider's track" on investments, such as a property development. In a wide-ranging critique from the 'left' Nick Cohen commented:

To add robbery to murder, it has built a military-industrial complex that keeps Egyptians poor by preventing new businesses competing with the elite monopolies it controls.

Link:http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-west-response

[TheCurmudgeon]

Somehow I have m' doubts that a serving or retired Egyptian soldier has excellent commercial acumen, more likely via the state apparatus he'd have an "insider's track" on investments, such as a property development.

Perhaps, but there is something out there called the Dictatorial or Autocratic Advantage. It basically states that a central government that is actively involved in creating wealth for the nation through nationalistic policies does a better job of raising the economic standings of all citizens then do democratic governments. It is common now to attack this idea and you will find dozens of papers that claim that no such advantage exists or that it is vastly over-stated, but none-the-less Nazi Germany and China both gained prosperity over a limited periods of time with a combination of private enterprise and state participation.

In addition there are many countries where the military funds itself through private endeavors (I believe the Philippines is one). That means that they have an understanding of business and profits, something most democratic governments do not ... and failing economics is oft cited as a reason for rebellion.

So I would still argue that, under the right conditions, a properly motivated military may be better able to right a failing economic ship then a fledgling democracy.

[ganulv]

So I would still argue that, under the right conditions, a properly motivated military may be better able to right a failing economic ship then a fledgling democracy.

I understand, though do not necessarily endorse, the argument that the Pinochet-led junta was a necessary remedy to the economic situation Chile found itself in as the Allende administration wore on. Like I said, I don’t necessarily endorse that argument, but it does make logical sense to say that what was needed was a sea change. But however much the Morsi government may have deepened the Egyptian economic crisis, the fact is that it was inherited from the same military government now headed by Sisi. I don’t know the workings of Egyptian politics, but I have to suspect that Mubarak and Sisi might both be being used as scapegoats.

[Fuchs]

Perhaps, but there is something out there called the Dictatorial or Autocratic Advantage. It basically states that a central government that is actively involved in creating wealth for the nation through nationalistic policies does a better job of raising the economic standings of all citizens then do democratic governments. It is common now to attack this idea and you will find dozens of papers that claim that no such advantage exists or that it is vastly over-stated, but none-the-less Nazi Germany and China both gained prosperity over a limited periods of time with a combination of private enterprise and state participation.

As an economist who studied this for five years and majored about quite exactly this I tell you:
Nazi Germany had a disappointing economic performance pre-WW2 given the circumstances. The Nazi economic policy was an outright disaster and unsustainable any way. The Federal Republic of Germany is still cleaning of the crappy regulations done by Nazis in the 30's of struggling with their legacy of effects.
China's economic growth is perfectly explainable without any bonus from state-owned industries (which are in fact a huge problem because of their inefficiency).

Strong central governments are quite good at creating national infrastructure, but they are substandard performers when it comes to creating "wealth".
A country with rigged markets* such as Egypt is not going to go forward at a useful pace any time soon.



*: Not to be confused with impartially regulated markets.

[TheCurmudgeon]

Fuchs,

So, as an economist, for a country that is having financial problems, would you prefer an autocratic system or a fledgling democratic one?

[Fuchs]

Fuchs,

So, as an economist, for a country that is having financial problems, would you prefer an autocratic system or a fledgling democratic one?

Financial problems? Do you men fiscal problems?
What kind of fiscal problems? Why not compare a fledgling autocratic system with a fledgling democratic system?

How could I possibly choose autocracy over democracy because of such a petty topic as money?

[carl]

Financial problems? Do you men fiscal problems?
What kind of fiscal problems? Why not compare a fledgling autocratic system with a fledgling democratic system?

How could I possibly choose autocracy over democracy because of such a petty topic as money?

Now Fuchs, don't evade the question. Just give it a shot.

[jmm99]

Starting with the Egyptian Army and its "grip" on the economy, the title says it all, Egypt military fights for macaroni, as well as security - Estimates of the Egyptian military's share of the country's economy range from 5% to 40% and its hands reach into many industries, including mining, real estate, farming and the production of household appliances (USA Today, 17 Aug 2013).

5% would make it a significant, material factor in the economy; 40% would make it an oligopolist, heading toward effective monopoly control. Which is the more factual case ? I don't know.

Then we have Gen. al-Sisi; for whom, we have two original source documents - the first, this year; the other in 2006: Excerpts from Washington Post interview with Egyptian Gen. Abdel Fatah al-Sissi; and Democracy in the Middle East (US Army War College, 2006).

Based on these (and other sources), we have two opinions that Gen. al-Sisi is an "Islamist":

Sisi's Islamist Agenda for Egypt - The General's Radical Political Vision (Foreign Affairs, Robert Springborg, July 28, 2013).

Why Egyptian Putschist General Al-Sisi’s Anti-Secular U.S. Army War College Thesis Matters (Andrew Bostrom, 10 Aug 2013).

Portrait of the General as a Not-So-Young Grad Student: Egypt's army chief isn't an Islamist -- in fact, his work at the U.S. Army War College suggests he may be a Mubarak clone (Foreign Policy, Eric Trager, 7 Aug 2013).

and these are just a sampling of divergent pundits.

Attached are pp.14-15 of al-Sisi's War College thesis (only 17 pages total). Based on his 2006 comments, I'd tag him as a moderate Muslim - though not a secularist. I see more than a little bit of Nassar in al-Sisi (the "masses", a Middle East "EU"; focus on Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen).

Regards

Mike