Democracy in the Middle East

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.
This article or section does not adequately cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
Any material not supported by sources may be challenged and removed at any time. This article has been tagged since April 2007.

Democracy in the Middle East is considered to be rare[citation needed]. The American Freedom House organization categorizes the Middle East as the least democratic region in the world. However, this is disputed by many governments in the region, many of whom claim to be democratic. Proposed reasons for the relative absence of liberal democracy in the Middle East are diverse, from the long history of imperial rule by the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France and the contemporary political and military intervention by the U.S., all of which have been blamed for preferring authoritarian regimes because this simplifies the business environment, while enriching the governing elite and the companies of the imperial countries. This is a social and economic justice explanation.[citation needed] Other explanations include the problem that most of the states in the region are rentier states, which experience the theorized resource curse.

Several orientalist scholars have attempted to explain the absence of democracy in the region. While some orientalists, such as Bernard Lewis[1] argue that democracy is incompatible with islamic culture and values, others put forward the development in the conceptualization of political practices. This mainstream advances the innovative approach adopted by political actors in interpreting religious texts which underpinnes that a gradual political opening is more efficient to reach democracy. As claims about the impact of civil society in the democratization process was put forward by the political economy approaches, the post-positivist interpretation stresses the importance to consider the interplay between culture, identity and discourse in framing Middle East politics.[2]

Accordingly, this article traces the history and assesses the current state and future prospects of democracy, democratic tendencies, and democratic movements in all countries in the broadly-defined Middle East region.

Contents

[edit] Current state

This article (or section) may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please help improve this article, especially its section layout, and relevant internal links. (help)
This article has been tagged since April 2007.

On the 14th of December 2006, the US Secretary of state Condoleezza Rice[3]stated that democracy in the Middle East was “non-negotiable”. This statement was taken positively by some and as a warning by others. In comparison with other areas of the world the Middle East has resisted democracy this resistance even led to arguments such as “Arab exceptionalism” a phase that prescribes that Arab nations are immune to modernization and democratization or it forms part of the “Clash” that authors such as Samuel Huntingdon[4] emphasize. However before such an approach becomes ingrained in the public conscience it is important to remember that there are a number of pro-democracy movements in the Middle East. A prominent figure in this movement is Saad Eddin Ibrahim who advocates and campaigns for democracy in Egypt and the wider region working with the Ibn Khaldun centre for development Studies.[5] When asked about his thoughts regarding the current state of democracy in the region he said:

“have become tuned or conditioned to thinking that the problems in the Middle East must be a chronic condition, not that they are only 30 years old, and not realizing that the reason for the current state of the Middle East was first, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and two, the Cold War.

The Cold War made the United States and other western democracies look the other way when it came to political oppression and allowed them to deal with tyrants and dictators”. Saad Eddin Ibrahim March 2005[6]

Post September 11 2001 what was envisaged would be a turning point in Middle East democracy however the general consensus is that little has changed and if anything the “War on Terror” has enabled many regimes to stifle democratic progress. The Middle East Forum (organization for promoting US interests in Middle East) recently published their table for measurement of democracy within Middle Eastern states.[7] See http://www.meforum.org/article/970#_ftn23

The results showed very little progress from 1999-2005 and the report even states that this pattern can be counter productive with Islamism being the only viable opposition in many Middle Eastern countries which is self defeating from a US perspective. This research along with the current issues in Iraq, have again cast a shadow of democratization in the Middle East.

The level of democracy varies widely from country to country. A few countries, such as Saudi Arabia, do not claim to be democracies; however, most of the larger states claim to be democracies, although this claim is in most cases disputed.
Middle East scholar Louise Fawcett notes how the United Nations Development Programme’s Arab Human Development Report 2002, albeit drafted by Western educated Arab intellectuals, is, however, modelled ‘on universal democratic principles.’[8] In addition, Fawcett argues that ‘Constitutional democracy is viewed not only as an intrinsic good by the putative globalisers who drafted this Report; it is also an instrumental necessity if the region is to stop stagnating and begin to catch up with the rest of the world.’[9]

[edit] Arab Socialism

A number of republics embracing Arab Socialism, such as Syria and Egypt, regularly hold elections, but critics assert that these are single-party states or unfair dominant-party systems and not full multi-party systems. Yemen, Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority, while also partly accepting this ideology, are generally considered more democratic than other states that do so, but the power of institutions in the latter two are limited by the domination of Syria and Israel, respectively.

[edit] Absolute monarchy

Absolute monarchy is more common in the Middle East than elsewhere, and even a number of kingdoms with parliaments have been claimed to fall broadly under this category. Saudi Arabia and most other kingdoms on the Arabian Peninsula are usually considered absolute monarchies.

[edit] Constitutional monarchy

Constitutional monarchy can be said to be at least partly embraced in some countries that are generally considered more democratic. Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain are examples of this category.

[edit] Islamic governments

Establishment of Islamic laws in Iran following the Iranian Revolution of 1979 has produced an electoral system that is limited by the vetoing power of a religious leader. However some elections in Iran, as the election of city councils satisfies democratic criteria. In other countries, the ideology (usually out of power) has fostered both pro-democratic and anti-democratic sentiments. The Justice and Development Party is a moderate democratic Islamist party that has come to power in traditionally secular Turkey. Its moderate ideology has been compared to Christian Democracy in Europe. The United Iraqi Alliance, the winner of the recent elections in Iraq, is a coalition including many religious parties.

[edit] Islamism

Al-Qaeda and its allies are deeply anti-democratic Islamists, believing that since sharia represents God's law, there is no place for law made by men. Larbi Sadiki, the author of The Search for Arab Democracy: Discources and Counter-discources notes that:

“…while Islamists generally are enmeshed in the discourse of and struggle for democracy, the type of democracy they have in mind revises and challenges Western foundations such as individualism and secularism.” This means that whilst looking to create an "authentic" identity,the constructed discourse supports the necessity to reject values emanating from the Western world.[10]

[edit] Israel/Palestine

Israel is considered to be a democracy within its 1948 borders, but not in its administration of the Palestinian territories. The Palestinian Authority, which exercises only limited sovereignty, has generally been considered to be more open than most Arab governments, particularly in light of the most recent presidential election.

[edit] Secularism

Secularism in the region was pioneered by Kemal Atatürk, who, though he himself had some authoritarian tendencies, helped establish the first modern Middle Eastern democracy in Turkey. Arab Socialism has also fostered secularism, though sometimes in what has been seen as a less democratic context. Secularism is not the same as freedom of religion, and secular governments have at times denied the rights of Islamists and other religious parties. A trend of a more liberal secularism supporting broader freedom of religion has developed recently in Turkey, while some Arab Socialist states have moved away from secularism to some extent, increasingly embracing religion, though many say without really increasing the rights of religious parties.

[edit] Western intervention

After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, many of the empire's former territories fell under the rule of European countries under League of Nations mandates. Thus, European powers were instrumental in establishing the first independent governments that emerged out of the Ottoman Empire. During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union competed for allies in the region and the U.S. has been accused of supporting dictatorships contrary to its stated democratic principles. The 1957 Eisenhower Doctrine provided a justified rhetoric for U.S. foreign policy to actively promote democracy in the Middle East. The U.S., with some allies, has in recent years invaded Afghanistan and Iraq with a partially stated purpose of establishing democracies there, to the opposition of those who say that democracy cannot be imposed from outside. The two countries have since had relatively successful elections, but have also experienced serious security and development problems.

Some believe that democracy can be established "only through force" and the help of the United States.[11] Writers such as Michele Dunne, when writing for the Carnegie Paper[12] concurs with the rhetoric of the late Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin (at that time, referring to peace and terrorism) that the foreign policy position of the US should be to ‘pursue peace as though there were no democratization, and pursue democratization as though there were no peace. In other words, the U.S. government should pursue reform and democratization as policy goals in the first instance without worrying excessively about tradeoffs with other goals.”[13] However, the Bush Administration has lost much credibility due to their inability to predict the outcomes of their interventions in the Middle East. The U.S. pressure behind the calling of the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections backfired, resulting in the democratically sound victory of Hamas, a "huge blow to Bush's advocacy of democracy in the Middle East".[14] Drawing upon the ideas of Middle East scholar Nicola Pratt it can be argued that:

“…the outcome of democratization efforts is [in reality]…contingent upon the degree to which actors’ chosen strategies contribute to either reproducing or challenging the relations of power between civil society and the state.”[15]


[edit] The State, Democratization & The Middle East

[edit] References and notes

  1. ^ Lewis,BWhat Went Wrong?The Clash between Islam and Modernity
  2. ^ Pratt,NIdentity,Culture and Democratization:The Case of Egypt
  3. ^ Rice discusses Middle East Democracy http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/articles/2006/ioi/061219-rice-democracy.html
  4. ^ Clash of civilisations Samaul P Huntingdon, ISBN-10: 074323149X
  5. ^ Ibn Khaldun centre for development Studies http://www.eicds.org/
  6. ^ Interview with Saad Eddin Ibrahim http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.2/ibrahim_interview.htm
  7. ^ The Middle East Forum, http://www.meforum.org/article/970#_ftn23
  8. ^ Fawcett, L(2005) International Relations in the Middle East Gosport: Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-926963-7 p 123
  9. ^ Fawcett, L(2005) International Relations in the Middle East Gosport: Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-926963-7 p 123
  10. ^ Sadiki, L (2004) The Search for Arab Democracy: Discources and Counter-discources India: C. Hurst & Co (Publishers) Ltd ISBN 1-85065-489-1 p 321
  11. ^ Democracy in the Middle East Can Only Be Established by Force
  12. ^ http://www.carnegieendowment.org
  13. ^ Michele Dunne, “Integrating Democracy Promotion into U.S. Middle East Policy”,Carnegie Paper No. 50, October 2004. p 8, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1381
  14. ^ Bush Is Conciliatory in Accepting Victory of Hamas
  15. ^ Pratt, N (May 2004) “Bringing politics back in: examining the link between globalization and democratization” Review of International Political Economy 11:2, p 331, DOI:10.1080/0969229042000249831

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/e/m/Democracy_in_the_Middle_East_4051.html"