Only when the colonial interests change, it was the colonial troops who act to bring change to the regime. British tanks besieged Abdeen palace in Cairo 1942 to force king Farouk to appoint a nationalist Wafdist cabinet to cooperate with Britain during WWII, despite 1936 agreement that make Egypt an independent and sovereign state Britain and Soviets reoccupied Iran in 1941 to force Reza Shah to leave the throne to his son Mohamed. The colonial powers established and supported authoritarian regimes that guarantee the continuity of the colonial interests and acted against any effort by the local political parties and movements to establish constitutional rule. That situation encouraged the states in the Middle East to be more authoritarian and, hence, more dependent. …show more content…
In addition to “divide and rule policy” , it created an alliance with the society elite, whether large landowners or tribal Sheikhs, to control rural areas. The elite, in exchange for political and economic privileges, can maintain security and manage the mobilization in rural area, and back the regime. Also, colonial administration emphasized the security and defense issues, to continue the political and security control and secures its colonial interests. Later to Independence, the governments created by the colonialism continued to use and emphasized the security policy and used force and power against the opposition. However, the economic inequality, the weakness of the systemand “failure of the bourgeoisie” created a vacuum of power and instability which allowed the nationalists officers to intervene and overthrow the “ancient regime” particularly in Egypt, Iraq and Syria or revolution like the case of Iran