On Monday the polls will open in Egypt so that voters can elect their president. The results are not in doubt: barring some truly staggering development, President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi will begin his second term. That too should have a certain outcome, ending in his departure from office under the constitution’s two-term limit. Will it?

This is a meaningful election in the same way that the 2013 power seizure that brought Mr Sisi to the top was not a coup. The truth is obvious; the question is whether it is more convenient for some to ignore it. As in the 2014 election, he faces a single opponent – in the loosest sense. Mousa Mostafa Mousa, a vocal supporter of Mr Sisi until his abrupt decision to stand, told one interviewer that he was “not here to challenge the president”. Most assume, despite his denials, that he is running solely to lend a veneer of credibility to events. Five other candidates have been jailed or otherwise taken out of contention. Rights organisations have denounced the contest as farcical, warning that Egypt is in the grips of the worst human rights crisis in decades. Mr Sisi’s recent claim that he wished he faced more challengers suggests only a hitherto undiscovered sense of humour. But there is nothing funny about the ruthless crushing of dissent since the army overthrew the elected Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohamed Morsi (now in jail), and massacred hundreds of his supporters.

The new order has proved more repressive than even Hosni Mubarak’s hated regime, forced out by Arab spring protests after three decades. That permitted a certain level of discussion because it believed it safer to let people vent frustrations; the new order appears to have concluded that tolerating any opposition is dangerous. There are tens of thousands of political prisoners and executions have risen sharply. A growing media crackdown has seen journalists detained and jailed; this weekend it emerged that a British reporter had been arrested and expelled.

While there is still popular support for Mr Sisi’s strongman rule, albeit perhaps reflecting the desire for stability after turbulence, the election will tell us little about the Egyptian people’s will. It has, however, exposed tensions in the military and security establishment, including via the failed attempts of the former senior military officers Ahmed Shafik and Sami Anan to stand. One complaint is the concentration of power. Since October, the regime has replaced the military chief of staff, the head of national security and the intelligence chief. Opponents have been beaten down.

Mr Sisi’s path has been smoothed by the political course of his international patrons, notably the US, UAE and Saudi Arabia. Egypt’s size and location have long been an advantage; now too it is regarded as essential to the fight against Islamic State – despite the grave concerns about the rising toll of violence in northern Sinai, which has been under emergency law since 2014 – and European leaders see it as vital to curbing migration. In a new report, Transparency International warns that western states and arms companies have contributed to the Egyptian military’s consolidation of power through aid and security assistance with minimal conditions.

The real question now is how long Mr Sisi stays in power. Supporters have called for the lifting of term limits (as happened last month in China); others have suggested extending the four-year terms. There might well be internal disquiet at such a shift. It might, too, galvanise broader opposition in Egypt. Could it be enough to prompt compliant western governments to push back? It should be.