An investigation of the implementation of authoritarian regimes and decision-making within authoritarian regimes in the Middle East.

Transcription

1 An investigation of the implementation of authoritarian regimes and decision-making within authoritarian regimes in the Middle East. Abstract;

2 Table of Contents. I. Introduction II. Methods III. Analysis and Discussion IV. Conclusion V. Bibliography

3 I. Introduction: The Middle east is an area full of authoritarian states and dictators, that control the vast majority of these countries. There are multiple arguments on how this decision-making affects the Middle east as well as certain other countries around the world. The following essay will investigate to what extent authoritarian decision-making plays a role in the Middle East. Several points will be covered including a discussion on where these authoritarian regimes come from and how they are able to establish there power in order to create effective decision making. The investigations will also cover why the regimes are II. Methods: There are several arguments about how authoritarian regimes in the Middle East are making their decision and how they are so strongly implemented. I think its important to see the background of these governments to understand, where the decisions come from and why these decisions are being made. The methods I use for this investigation are that I looked at several books and journal articles and implemented them in my work. I also looked at interviews and the Arab Human Development Report. III. Analysis and Discussion: One of the most significant facts about leaders in Middle Eastern country is the fact they usually are fairly long lasting and also the capability to withstand difficult times and be able to live through them. (Whitaker p 81) The same ruler doesn t necessarily have to stay in power the whole time, although that s also the case in many Middle Eastern countries, as we can see through the examples of Gaddafi in Libya who ruled for over forty years or Ali Abdullah Salih of Yemen who ruled for thirty-five years. Tribes and families usually dominated regimes in the Middle East over a longer span of years, as that becomes significant in understanding the composition of governments as well as understanding their different ways of finding legitimacy within their own country as well as for the big developed countries. (Whitaker p.81-83) There are two types of regimes within the Arab nations, one being the monarchies, which relied on a heavier traditional background. Within these monarchies tribal as well as religious roots often was the indicator through which their authoritarian rulers tried to seek legitimacy, since the are not doing so through free elections. (Whitaker p.86) Many Authoritarian governments today are still in power due to their tribal roots from the eighteenth century as we can see these cases in Kuwait through the Sabah family and in Saudi Arabia in which the royal family is still in power and still today is regulating the next follower on the throne through a family council. The usage of this council as well as the need to receive a pledge of allegiance from other important figures within the Saudi government assures the reigning family that the ruler with the greatest popularity and through that the ruler with the greatest succession possible is in power and the population wont rebel so that the family wont loose supremacy. (Herb p.36)

4 The second type of regime within the Middle Eastern countries is the Arab republics. The republics developed from rebel revolutionist movements and can be found in various Middle eastern countries like Syria, Yemen Egypt or Palestine. They all provide nationalistic views, which in some cases can become extremism. The ideology the rulers of the republics use are significant since the ways in which they legitimize their ruling is in a very Marxist way. They announce land reforms as well as employment less poverty and a higher standard of living. They also show themselves as non-corruptive, anti-capitalistic and as defenders of the nations independence. (Whitaker p.91) They show themselves as being the better end of two evils and through that are able to legitimize their ruling. (AHDR 2004 p.129) Through looking at the examples of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait we can see that religion is definitely having an impact on how the government is ruling. Especially in Saudi Arabia, the government has to differentiate between the traditionalist and educated liberals. While the liberals want to implement new modernised reforms that benefit technology as well as the modernization of the state on the other side there were the traditionalist who want their religious principles to remain implemented. A good example is the question of the rights of woman in Saudi Arabia, which in the opinion of the traditionalists should not be changed. (Whitaker p. 90) Generally it can be said that within monarchies in the Middle East the chance of implementing a democratic system, which would lead away from an authoritarian government, are higher due to the fact that the traditions within the countries are secured and there are other modernisation ideas available which in total could lead away from absolutism within monarchies. (Whitaker p. 91) If we look at Arab countries in the Middle east we can see that the main objective of the regime is to stay in power as long as possible and keep the people as happy as possible, although in many cases they are being repressed. They want to have the least enemies possible to stay in control of the state funds so that they can harm opponents and to ultimately increases their personal wealth as long as possible. (Whitaker p.92) Based on this observation something that also is very interesting is the fact how whole families are able to control a state and through that is guaranteed full control of the country. This phenomenon was firstly described by Max weber as being a patrimony system, which basically implies that the mechanics of a household are the model for administration. In other words this is saying that the authoritarian leader in a Middle Eastern Government has complete control over the state since all important decision like the ministry of finance as well as the interior and the defence minister positions are exercised by members of the same family and through that increases loyalty and dependence within the government. Ultimately that creates a higher rate of succession and also makes sure that the leading positions of the country are in the hands of the same family. (Adams ) One interesting example is Saudi Arabia in which 7 of the twenty-eight ministers have the same family name and are positioned n the highest positions within the country. The family members are implementing the prime minister, deputy minister, defence minister, foreign minister as well as interior minister positions, which shows that the same family, exercises all the strongest and most strategic positions within the government and through that assures the existence of the current regime. (Schlumberger 2007) As well

5 An additional interesting fact regarding the decision making of Authoritarian leaders in the Middle East is the fact that they like to make the people addicted to the ruling government. A good case where that is practiced with big success is Syria. In Syria there are 19 million people living, from which 1.5 million are working for the government. If these 1.5 million people now have multiple people to take care of, there is a suggestion that about half of the Syrian population is dependant on the government, which ultimately leads to a population that is willing to follow his leader. (Whitaker p.96) Furthermore there are cases in which Middle Eastern countries are being supported by the United States and are terribly corrupt through the result of that. Since there are so many natural resources within the Middle Eastern countries, the interest of the developed countries is heavily increased and they have their word to say in who is in the regime of the country. As we can see in Egypt Mubarak is supported by the US and is able to live of the Us support, while they are exploiting the country, he is getting paid by them and is able to support and bribe his followers to keep that rhythm going. Nothing has changed to the past and the people acknowledge that aren t provided with anything by the state. They follow the principle no taxation without representation, which is one of the main reasons why there are such low taxes in Middle eastern countries. Another reasons for these low taxes IV. Conclusion: In conclusion it is definitely obvious that decision making in Middle eastern countries are usually made by one person and are made to stay in power as long as possible, to achieve the greatest amounts of profits possible. The decision making process in the Middle East always seems to have two sides to it and as long as the beneficial side is guaranteed to be collected by the government, they are very willing to let the population suffer. This underlines that corruption is one of the biggest problems there is in the middle east and that in my opinion a lot of this comes from the curse of oil as well as the interference of more developed countries into the region of the Middle East.

6 V. Bibliography: Whitaker, Brian. What's Really Wrong with the Middle East. London: Saqi, Print. Herb, Michael: All in the Family: Absolutism, Revolution, and Democracy in the Middle Eastern Monarchies. Albany: State University of New York, Adams, Julia: The Rule of the Father: Patriarchy and Patrimonialism in Early Modern Europe, pp in Camic C, Gorski PS and Trubek DM (eds): Max Weber s Economy and Society: A Critical Companion. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2005 Schlumberger, Oliver: Statehood and Governance: Challenges in the Middle East and North Africa. Briefing Paper 4/2007. Bonn: German Development Institute (Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik), 2007 AHDR p.149