Is the army on the right road to democratization, or is it risking what some call "restoration" of the authoritarian regime in a new form?.
The internal affairs in Egypt, after the 25th of January uprising, have been in a state of political and social turmoil. Almost nothing has remained constant in Egypt for the past three years; positions have changed, alliances have changed, and the Egyptian people's overall view of things has changed, not necessarily to the better. Nevertheless, the question of whether the army is fit to rule Egypt under a democratic state remains the issue three years after what has been described as the biggest revolution in Egypt's modern history. However, is it right to assume that the army, as an entity, has been a uniform body acting out a certain agenda throughout that period, or is it that the army's position has changed since Mubarak's rule to the present day as a result of the changes in leadership?.
The first step in trying to find an answer to that question would be to trace the different positions of the army at every stage during that period. When the 25th of January uprisings erupted, the army basically did not show any signs of support to the Mubarak regime. And whether it was out of seeking personal interest or loyalty or dedication to the people, the army instead, chose a neutral position in support of the people's demands. As the demonstrations reached a boiling point, General Hussein Tantawi and General Omar Soliman pressured Mubarak to give in to the people's demands and step down, which he did, with great reluctance nevertheless, on the 11th of February 2011. After that, the country entered a transitional period where the supreme council of armed forces was to rule until the time that a democratic presidential election would be held, and it was this period that caused the first wave of change in the army's position.