Tag Archives: Arab Spring
Discordant Development – Progress That Increases Instability
Samuel Huntington argued in his 1968 classic Political Order in Changing Societies that rapid development could be highly destabilizing:
Social and economic change—urbanization, increase in literacy and education, industrialization, mass media expansion—extend political consciousness, multiply political demands, broaden political participation. These changes undermine traditional sources of political authority and traditional political institutions; they enormously complicate the problems of creating new bases of political association and new political institutions combining legitimacy and effectiveness. The rates of social mobilization and the expansion of political organization are high; the rates of political organization and institutionalization are low. The result is political instability and disorder. The primary problem of politics is the lag in the development of political institutions behind social and economic change.
Richard Joseph, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and a Professor at Northwestern University, discusses a similar point in a recent article on Africa. In it, he introduces the very useful phrase “discordant development,” defining it as:
More than just “unequal development,” but rather how deepening inequalities and rapid progress juxtaposed with group distress can generate uncertainty and violent conflict. (more…)
Bahrain: The Three Conflicts Shaping the Broader Crisis
Justin Gengler, who recently completed his PhD dissertation on Bahrain, presented a keen analysis of the social and political dynamics driving the conflict in the country during a presentation at the Brookings Institute in Doha at the end of November. These dynamics shape and help explain what each actor or group is doing and what they are likely to do next. According to Justin, Bahrain is more than divided between a government and an opposition (as often interpreted). Rather, it is facing three mutually reinforcing conflicts, each of which is working to preclude resolution of the others and making the overall political crisis intractable.
Although Justin emphasizes the sectarian element, the picture he presents is much more complicated. The Sunni government is divided, the Shiite opposition is divided, and the Sunni population is divided. Each contain moderates and extremists. Action by extremists in one group empowers extremists in another, creating a vicious cycle with no obvious way out. (more…)
Causes of Revolution: The Role of Youth and other Social Factors
By Jack A. Goldstone, George Mason University
The below are excerpts from an article originally appearing in World Politics Review.
The conditions for revolt or revolution to spread throughout society are reasonably well established: First, the national government must be closed to broad participation or popular control. Second, the government must be weakened by some sort of crisis. This crisis may be a material one, such as a military or development failure, fiscal distress, sustained inflation or sharp spikes in food prices. Or the crisis may be ideological, as when a government seeks to impose an ideology that is widely opposed by its own elites, or when a government is seen as compromised by identification with foreign enemies. Or it may be a succession crisis that leads elites to shift allegiances and contend for power in a coming leadership change. Several of these items may combine to create a widespread sense of uncertainty and anxiety about the future.
In such periods of social anxiety, a great deal depends on which groups are willing to support the regime and which groups still perceive the leadership as legitimate. Governments that are perceived as just and effective generally retain the support of key elites and thus popular groups; they are therefore quite resistant in the face of . . . challenges. On the other hand, states that are widely considered ineffective or unjust by their population rapidly lose key supporters and can succumb with astounding quickness in the face of challenges — as in the Philippines in 1986, the Soviet Union in 1989 and Tunisia and Egypt in 2010-2011. (more…)
More on Conflict and Security, Governance, Investing
Differentiating Between Fragile States and Transition Countries
The term “fragile states” is much abused.
Policymakers, development researchers, politicians, and the media seem to think that every country experiencing a period of instability or bothered by certain governance problems is “fragile.” As a result, they group a wide range of countries experiencing vastly different types of problems together—creating a mass of confusion in the process.
Such thinking means that the term as currently used has very little value as an analytical tool. Instead it has become a catchall phrase to explain any situation that seems “fragile” even if the fragility is likely to be ephemeral. It also means that states that are structurally fragile but that have none of the most obvious symptoms of fragility (such as Syria before 2011) do not get considered as one.
The Arab Spring shows the vacuousness of this approach. Before 2011, few of the countries currently in turmoil were considered fragile. Now almost all of them are. How can both these things be true? (more…)
Reforming Constitutions and Election Laws after the Arab Spring
Andrew Reynolds, John Carey, and Donald Horowitz spoke on reforming constitutions and election systems after the Arab Spring at the National Endowment for Democracy recently.
They argue for inclusiveness and the importance of electoral design to stability, equity, and institution building, all essential to democracy and development.
Why More Islam Not Less is Good for the Middle East
Religion has played an important part in the Arab Spring, either as a ideological influence behind calls for change or, more recently, as a major force in elections. Islamic parties already dominate the political scene in Tunisia and Egypt, and will likely do so anywhere else democracy allows a free vote.
Most Westerners assume that that these trends can only end up hurting the region. For them, religion is a major cause of the problems that plague the Middle East, and greater secularism is essential for democracy and progress. But such notions show just how little outsiders understand the region, its dominant faith, and the political dynamics driving change from Morocco to Iran. (more…)
How Long is the Assad Regime Likely to Survive in Syria?
Joshua Landis, who runs the blog Syria Comment and teaches at the University of Oklahoma, has a great essay for Middle East Policy on the prospects for the Assad regime in Syria. He believes it will last at least into 2013: (more…)
Is Yemen Breaking Apart?
When central authority is weak or nonexistent, local authority of some nature replaces it.
In some countries, this local authority may actually be better organized, and more able to deliver competent public services than the state. Somaliland, for instance, has done much better than Somalia ever did for the people who live in the area it controls. In Afghanistan, the most successful public sector programs were implemented in a way that allowed local communities to manage them.
Of course, this is not always the case. Parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo have fallen into chaos in the absence of any semblance of a state. Nigeria’s repeated bursts of violence and terrorism (in the Niger Delta and more recently in the north) can be at least partially traced to the inability of that country’s government to effectively govern at any level.
Yemen is a case study on how these processes work their way out. Central authority has always been weak. The strength of the country’s tribes provide an alternative foci for people’s loyalties and an alternative source of public goods. (more…)
Syria’s Ethnic and Religious Divisions
Syria's Religious Demography
Maps show how divided Syria is and how dangerous a breakdown in public authority is likely to be. (more…)
Arabs want Jobs as much as Votes
Economies that cannot produce jobs often produce crises instead.
While the Arab Spring is ostensibly about democracy, it is really about dignity, and good jobs are an essential component of this.
But the instability the protests have unleashed is scaring away investors and hurting economies. It risks undermining one of the main desires of protestors–for more satisfying work.
Tunisia is the canary bird for the whole region. It erupted first, held elections first, and arguably has the best chance to construct a new regime that works well enough to meet the demands of citizens for a better life. If it cannot succeed, the whole region is likely to struggle. (more…)
