A new report from the Congressional Research Service assesses the economic state of post-revolution Egypt and finds it fairly grim.
“After more than two years of social unrest and economic stagnation following the 2011 popular uprising, the government of Egypt is facing serious economic pressures that, if not remedied, could lead to economic collapse and possibly new levels of violence,” the report says.
“Egyptian authorities and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have been in negotiations for more than two years over an IMF loan to Egypt in exchange for policy reforms that, if successful, could stave off economic collapse and create more ‘inclusive’ growth…. [but] No agreement has been finalized or implemented to date. Egyptian authorities have been reluctant to commit to economic reforms that may be politically unpopular and increase the country’s debt.”
Background on the negotiations and on U.S. aid to Egypt are presented in Egypt and the IMF: Overview and Issues for Congress, April 29, 2013.
Some other CRS reports on Middle Eastern countries that have been recently updated include the following.
Iraq: Politics, Governance, and Human Rights, April 26, 2013
Iran Sanctions, April 24, 2013
U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, April 11, 2013
Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses, April 4, 2013
Jordan: Background and U.S. Relations, April 1, 2013
January saw us watching whether the government would fund science. February has been about how that funding will be distributed, regulated, and contested.
This rule gives agencies significantly more authority over certain career policy roles. Whether that authority improves accountability or creates new risks depends almost entirely on how agencies interrupt and apply it.
Our environmental system was built for 1970s-era pollution control, but today it needs stable, integrated, multi-level governance that can make tradeoffs, share and use evidence, and deliver infrastructure while demonstrating that improved trust and participation are essential to future progress.
Durable and legitimate climate action requires a government capable of clearly weighting, explaining, and managing cost tradeoffs to the widest away of audiences, which in turn requires strong technocratic competency.