Name of student:
Course name:
Class name:
Date assignment due:
Contents
Internal and external forces. 1
Political, economic and social factors. 5
Internal and external forces
Countries of the Arab world are unable to achieve democratic goals mainly because of the lack of a political community that is receptive to the democratic aspirations of the entire population. This political community should be viewed in the context of the larger social setting at the national level. If the political class was receptive to the aspirations of social groups to bring about a transition into democracy, it would be possible for transitional governments to be put in place in order to give democratic leaders to compete for leadership in future democratic institutions.
ORDER POLITICAL SCIENCE PAPER NOW
The nature of the civil society groups in Arab countries, according to Whitehead, is an impediment to the democratization process (65). Whitehead observes that the policies they use to push for democratic transition are normative rather than determinist in nature. There is a lack of a robust civil society that is able to build the right amount of social capital in order to put pressure on authoritarian rulers to pave way for the democratization process.
Anderson says that the political regimes that are found in Arab countries are a reflection of the political economies that have existed in these countries for many decades (78). The political culture in the Arab world is treated by western scholars with suspicion owing to the influences that it has gotten from Arab culture.
According to Anderson, the prototypical Arab political system is influenced by two main traditional kinship characteristics: (a) the informal, egalitarian, close-knit and personal character of the ethnic organization and (b) the patriarchal authoritarian nature of all imperial governments in the Arab world (82). These characteristics are easy to discern if you are preoccupied with the issue of tribes when analyzing the political cultures of the Arab world.
If one employs political culture to explain the political systems of the Arab world, the findings will be that these systems are characterized by violence. It is interesting to note that such analysis obviously ignores comparisons with other political systems that exist in other parts of the world and more importantly, the impact of external influences on the systems of government that thrive in this region. Instead, relative importance is given to tribal traditions, Islam dictates and Ottoman legacies, all of which have led to violent methods of political conflict resolution.
Apart from being seen to promote violence, kinship ties, for example in Iraq, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, are also assigned the responsibility for weakness and sometimes the absence of the associational life that has for a long time been considered the foundation of democratic politics.
Authoritarianism in the Arab is often attributed to Islamic beliefs. People from the outside world have strongly held this view, something that angers Arabs: both in the Diaspora and at home. In recent years, the association that is often made between Islam and extremist terrorist activities has not made the perceptions of the outside world any better regarding the nature of Arab politics. The more extremism continues to be hinged on religion, the bigger the impediment towards the achievement of democratic processes and institutions becomes.
Anderson agrees with Hunnington, a comparative politics scholar who did research in Egypt and whose findings were that Islam does not have a strong influence on the political attitudes among Egyptians (88). The investigator reported that matters of religiosity as they apply to a practical understanding of Islam are a neutral factor when the issue of development is being discussed. Islam neither hinders development nor furthers it.
In the eyes of a foreign journalist, comparativist, academic historian, policy analyst, and political scientist, an assessment on political culture in the Arab is mostly a negative one. The negative tones of all assessments made concerning the Arab world are evident for all uninitiated observers to figure out. The effect of these partial assessments by foreign powers contributes to the hardening of authoritarianism by Arabian leaders as a way of stamping their authority and territorial integrity.
The influences of western stereotypes concerning the nature of authoritarian governments in the Arab world on relationships between Arabs and the outside world is always there for all people to see. These stereotypes have contributed to the mutual mistrust that Arab countries and their allies have towards the West.
Perceptions about the Arab world by western countries have taken the place of more fundamental issues such as the nature of institutional structures, regime constituencies, class relations, population growth rate, government policy biases, among many other things before the real significance and context of political attitudes can be objectively assessed.
Historical forces
In a world characterized by multiple democratization processes especially after the end of the Cold War, the Arab world stood out as an outstanding exception, together with the complicated case of China. However, at different times, one Arab nation or the other appeared to be on the brink of democratization but none fully underwent a transition into a fully-fledged democracy.
The cultural and social peculiarities of the Arab world that many people attribute to the continued existence of authoritarian governments have a strong historical underpinning. Islamic practices are part of the historical legacy of the Arab world. Luciani observes that the case for asserting a basic incompatibility between democratic government and Islam is often supported by circumstances whereby almost all non-Arab countries also happen to be non-democratic (131). Luciani sounds unconvincing for failing to give the examples of the non-democratic Islamic governments that he is referring to.
The argument that links fiscal matters to the formation of the state has historical roots in all the political processes that culminated in revolution and democratization all over Europe. Attempts by the Arab countries, notably Saudi Arabia, to buy international consensus through the distribution of goods and revenue in exchange for virtually nothing do not require to be democratically legitimated. However, locally, they result in factionalism, as has happened in Iraq, a situation that leads to the collapse of transitional democracies and resorts to authoritarian rule as incumbents struggle to stamp their authority.
Contemporary forces
Today, democratization does not seem appealing to the Arab world especially because of the dynamics of fiscal policies that come with a shift towards democratic institutions. Pratt notes that in both democracies and authoritarian governments, deficit spending is a very common economic practice (241). When this happens, inflation rate increases, Arabian regimes feel free to use administration price-control measures and to instill fiscal discipline, something that democratic governments cannot do. However, in the long run, authoritarian governments are highly ineffective in matters of stabilizing a country’s fiscal capacity. The best examples of authoritarian governments that have been inefficient in accounting for public finance in times of inflation include Iran, Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
Political, economic and social factors
In the Arab world, democratic methods are not attractive whether they are assessed on a political, economic or social dimension. On a political dimension, they create room for the formation of many groups with particularistic agenda. On an economic dimension, they create constraints on the measures that a government can do to steer the economy back on the path of growth. On the social front, democracy appears as the Western way of justifying the stereotypes they hold about the Arab world especially those that relate to religion-motivated extremism and terrorism and kinship.
ORDER POLITICAL SCIENCE PAPER NOW
Any argument that links the need for democratization in the Arab world to fiscal crises is valid although it would be better if this democratization coincided with political and economic liberalization. Today, such a coincidence does not seem likely. This is largely because there is a lack of a managerial and entrepreneurial class that can confidently demand to have a say as well as demand accountability in a new democratic government.
The main reason why Arab states have never depended on the bourgeoisie in matters of economic stability is that there exists mistrust between an authoritarian government and the larger population. Authoritarian governments, therefore, find themselves relying on external debt rather than domestic borrowing. The population seems reluctant to commit their money to a government that they have no control of.
The social setting in many Arab countries, notably Libya, Iran, and Saudi Arabia is such that civil society can do nothing except in support of existing authoritarian governments that are founded on deeply entrenched patriarchal kinships. Other factors such as social stratification, absolute poverty, illiteracy, religious segmentation (for example, Iraq) and absolute poverty make it increasingly difficult for civil society to accumulate enough social capital to bring about a democratic revolution.
Works Cited
Anderson, Lisa. “Democracy in the Arab World a Critique of the Political Culture Approach” The Search for Arab Democracy: Discourses and Counter-Discourses, Larbi Sadiki. London: C. Hurst & Co, 2004, 77-92.
Luciani, Giacomo. “The Oil Rent, the Fiscal Crisis of the State and Democratization” Democracy Without Democrats?: The Renewal of Politics in the Muslim World, Ghassan Salamé. New York: I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.
Pratt, Nicola. Democracy and Authoritarianism in the Arab World, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2007.
Whitehead, Lawrence. 2002. Democratization: Theory and Experience, Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA.