Economic Policy Reform in Egypt
Harik has been studying the Egyptian economy with a political scientist's eye for much of the past 30 years. This book is a major interpretation of the choices made in the Nasser era to design a managed economy to promote order and balance, and only secondarily to foster growth. Harik argues that it is a mistake to see in the Nasser model a clear preference for urban workers over rural peasants -- the so-called urban bias model -- because the regime was seeking to appease both. He describes a regime more concerned about jobs than profits, simultaneously extracting wealth from the population by means of low wages and providing subsidies to keep food prices, energy, and housing inexpensive. This all makes a certain kind of sense. But it had disastrous economic consequences. Beginning in the 1980s, Egyptian leaders knew that serious reforms were needed, but they feared the political and social consequences of embracing the free-market model. Egypt has finally begun to carry out serious reforms -- Harik dates them to about 1990 -- and has recently been added to a major index of emerging markets; in addition, the stock market has been rapidly rising. Harik concludes with thoughts on the proper role of the state as mediator with the private sector. All in all, a very impressive book.
Related
The United States is spreading its aid and efforts too thin in the developing world. It should focus on a small number of "pivotal states": countries whose fate determines the survival and success of the surrounding region and ultimately the stability of the international system. The list should include Mexico, Brazil, Algeria, Egypt, South Africa, Turkey, India, Pakistan, and Indonesia. A discriminating strategy for shoring up the developing world is a wise way to address traditional security threats and new transnational issues; it might be thought of as the new, improved domino theory. If effective, it could forestall the move in Congress to wipe out nearly all foreign aid.
No area of the world had a greater impact on American politics, national security, and economic well-being than did the Middle East in 1979. With the fall of the Pahlavi regime in Iran early in the year, a profound change in the regional balance of power took place. In November, when the deposed Shah was admitted to the United States for medical treatment, militants seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and at the end of the year were still holding about 50 Americans hostage--with the support of Ayatollah Khomeini, the head of the new Iranian Islamic Republic. And in late December the Soviet Union used its own forces to replace one communist leader in Afghanistan with another more to its liking and subsequently sent over 50,000 troops to secure the new regime and to put down insurgents in the countryside.
