The continuing unrest in Egypt has undermined hopes for a dramatic shift away from the authoritian regime that was in place before the spring 2011 revolution. Latest developments raise further questions about Morsi's ability to lead the nation away from the oppressive regimes of the past. A recent piece in the New York Times describing the State of Emergency declared in three Egyptian cities on Sunday, January 27, observed: "By imposing a one-month state of emergency in Suez, Ismailia and here in Port Said, where the police have lost all control, Mr. Morsi’s declaration chose to use one of the most despised weapons of former President Hosni Mubarak’s autocracy." The piece went on to comment that "a state of emergency suspends the ordinary judicial process and most civil rights. It gives the president and the police extraordinary powers." And today's New York Times reports that " the nation’s top general warned Tuesday that the state itself was in danger of collapse if the feuding civilian leaders could not agree on a solution to restore order."
Comments on the parallels between both governments are not new, and certainly not to Josh Stacher: "Morsi's declaration of a state of emergency in Egypt's three most central canal cities is partially a reaction to the inherited legacy of the Egyptian state after Hosni Mubarak's overthrow and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces-led transition. Morsi is unable to prevent the periodic but routine violence from happening because he refuses to address the protesters' most basic demand: To reform the Interior Ministry and its coercive instruments.
obstruction of his attempts to lead. Given that the 18 days of revolt in 2011 dislodged Mubarak but did not break the state, it is producing an overall deterioration of state authority and weakening of the state elites' ability to project power or heed the calls of its citizens."