Political Systems in the Middle East and North Africa - Essay Example

? POLITICAL SYSTEMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA and number: submitted: POLITICAL SYSTEMS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA Islam constitutes a source of both legitimacy and illegitimacy to some Arab regimes”, discuss this statement. Politics generally refers to the way in which a group of people are ruled. Generally, the most important premise that is attached to politics is whether or not the ruling is ruling the ruled in a manner that is in conformity with the hopes and socio-economic aspiration of the people (Al-Sayyid, 2003). To this end, there is no single form of political rule that or political system that can be considered to be better than the other. What is generally important is how applicable the said political system is in the premise and setting in which it is being used. In most Middle East and North Africa countries, democracy and authoritarian rules are predominant. But within these key facets of political rules or systems, there is what seems to be a centralized inculcation of Islamic rule, where in some cases is referred to as political Islam. By implication, Islamic religious practice has been made to dominate in most contemporary political systems in the Middle East and North Africa. Historians and political analysts have sought to find the impact of political islam on contemporary political rule. There are several schools of opinion, two of which can be generalized as those who opine that Islam constitute a source of legitimacy to some Arab regimes, and others opining that Islam constitute a source of illegitimacy to some Arab regimes. A very careful consideration of the claims may render the two opinions as both accurate, depending on the perspective from which the argument is taken. Generally, most Arab regimes come into play from two major perspectives. These perspectives are military and ideological perspectives of Arab regimes. The Iranian Revolution in 1979 is perhaps considered as the biggest military success in an Arab regime, even though some other examples of military regimes exist in other parts of the Middle East and North Africa (Ghalioun and Costopoulos, 2004). Saudi Arabia on the other hand can be viewed as an example of Arab regime that came into force as a result of ideological perspective. As far as Islam is concerned, both those who take up their regimes from military perspective and those who does so from ideological perspective use Islamic religious contexts to argue their reason for coming into power. The various forms of military revolutionary movements which were experienced in the 1970s are examples of regimes that came into force with Islamic political persuasion that the corrupt and ineffective economic structures of existing regimes needed to be made better by use of Islamic principles. However, even though the military regimes in places like Iran was successful in their constitution, those in places like Sudan failed woefully in 1989. From this understanding, it can be said that the debate that Islam constitutes a source of both legitimacy and illegitimacy to some Arab regimes could be true, depending on the outcome of the regimes that are in place. Even with those who have taken political power through ideological persuasions, the fact remains that not all of them have legitimized their regimes because they failed woefully. A typical example of such regime is the Muslim Brotherhood style democratic take-over, which came with the argument that secularism could not be accepted because it was based on Western liberalism but ended up being a more oppressive and corrupt regime (Pape, 2003). How has the oil wealth affected the prospects of democratization in the Arab Gulf? Oil is a natural resource that accounts for a gross domestic product contribution for most countries in the Arab Gulf. Indeed, countries in the Arab Gulf benefit from oil as a contributor to their gross domestic product than any other source of wealth (Pupcenoks, 2012). It is for this reason that the term, oil wealth has been coiled by most reviewers. But the creation of the term did not come alone without a major contribution of its effect on democratization in the Arab Gulf. There are historical and political incidences in the Oman that may both approve and deny the thinking that the oil wealth has affected the prospects of democratization in the Arab Gulf negatively. On the part of those who do not believe that oil wealth has affected the prospects of democratization in the Arab Gulf negatively, their basis for argument is that when countries become rich, they become more open global politicking, greater part of which is founded on the basis of democracy (Sayyid, 2011). Some political scientists have even said that the dream of democratization in the Arab Gulf was even born as a result of the oil wealth. This is because as oil became abundant and the economies of the Arab Gulf became expanded, more and more foreign investments that would only strive on the basis of democracy became attracted to the Arab Gulf. Because there had to be democratic trade systems such as the creation of fair and open judiciary systems and fair trade policies before some of these international companies would bench their tents in the Arab Gulf, most governments started introducing democracy as a way of not losing out on the financial prosperity that was coming. The above argument notwithstanding, there are several instances and cases that can be raised to actually conclude that on a generalized basis and premise, oil wealth has affected the prospect of democratization in the Arab Gulf negatively. First of all, it would be noted that oil as a national resource is controlled by the State or central government. Meanwhile, it is common knowledge that since gaining independence, most governments in the Arab Gulf have been authoritarians. This way, putting oil wealth in the hands of the government becomes equivalent to putting the oil wealth in the hands of the ruler and in effect, a few people in political power. With the wealth in oil as a global resource, people who become wealthier as a result of oil also become powerful. This way, the need to remain in power because of the pleasure of it sets in. Secondly, political leaders in the Arab Gulf who have a mentality that democracy will open their economies up to international influences, especially from the West push themselves away from democracy so that those forms of influence will not exist (Abrahms, 2012). By slowing down the process of democratization, most countries in the Arab Gulf have a means of becoming the sole determinants and authorities over their oil wealth. Finally, in most oil rich Arab Gulf nations such as Syria, the remittances of workers have become an important source of foreign exchange (Al-Sayyid, 2003). This makes most employees and the labor force very powerful. As a way of ensuring that the governments use radical and non-democratic means of taking back monies from these workers, the process of democracy is slowed so that the mouthpiece of the people to protest against economic policies will generally be shut. Evaluate the role of civil society in promoting democracy in the Arab World. The promotion of democracy is based on several factors and building blocks. Normally when the task of democratization is left in the hands and care of only a few people, it fails woefully. It is for this reason that the stakeholders of democracy have been identified to be many and with several different agency and roles. Civil society is a typical example of stakeholders in democracy especially in the Arab World. The reason why stakeholder base in democracy is especially important in the Arab World is the number of years for which that region of the world has lived without a resourceful and working class of democracy (Gramsci, 1971). As child with deficiency in certain medical growth areas, resuscitation and interventions for growth is often made diverse and multi-variant. In the Arab World, civil society can be identified to include non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and institutions that have a focused agenda of protecting the interests and wellness of the citizenry. The civil society in the United Arab Emirate has become very instrumental in the promotion of democracy through two major means or forms. In the first place, civil society groups have become the mouthpiece of the citizenry through the defense, promotion and protection of the fundamental human rights of the people. It would be noted that the protection and practice of human rights is a core provision of any democratic reign, be it at the organizational level or the societal level. Once people will be allowed to possess and practice their fundamental human rights without any abuse of it, democracy is allowed to grow (Ghalioun and Costopoulos, 2004). But where the fundamental human rights of people are made to become suppressed, authoritarianism and autocracy sets in. civil society groups in Bahrain have therefore made the protection of human rights their core duties by identifying cases of human rights abuse in all sectors of the lives of the people and bringing these issues up to the public domain for fair trial and justice. Because the human rights of citizens, foreigners and organizations are protected and defended, the grounds for democracy become more fertile for nationwide practice. This task of civil society also makes the Arab World attractive to other democratic loving nations to extend their supports of help in the growth of democracy. What is more, democracy has been identified to be a way of life rather than an ordinary system of governance. What this means is that democracy must be seen as part of the people by the people knowing what their rights and responsibilities are in a democratic nation. Without this knowledge, the people cannot tell whether or not the kind of democracy being practice is in the right direction. Without this knowledge also, the citizenry cannot know the roles they have to play to make their democracies grow. This is because rights must always go with responsibilities (Pupcenoks, 2012). In most Arab countries therefore, the civil society have made this education and advocacy program their core duty to ensure that not just some, but all people have adequate knowledge of what democracy is and how democracy can be practiced right from the corners of their homes (Kramer, 2011). Some of the means by which the civil world has done this is through national, institutional and individual level education and advocacy. In the 2003 Educational Reform of Jordan for instance, the role that civil society played in ensuring that Democratic Studies was made part of the curriculum have been praised by the international media (Mamdani, 2011). Discuss the dual role of the security sector in the Arab World as both a source of political stability and instability. A country without a formidable security force has been described to be a prison without doors because it exposes the country to external attacks and possible out fleeing of its citizenry (Gramsci, 1971). This is why it is important that all countries, including those in the Arab have very firm security forces in place. But the existence of security forces have been identified not to be an end in itself when talking of national development and consolidation of the forming pillars of the country (Pape, 2003). Generally, the security of a country would be judged based on the extent and manner in which security authority and force is applied and this is no different for the Arab World. Political scientists have said that where the security of the Arab World leads to the growth and development of the fundamental protection of the will of the larger population, then it will be said that the security system has led to a stable political system. Where such protection of the fundamental will of the larger population cannot be protected, it is said that the security system has brought political instability (Kramer, 2011). In the Arab World’s context, both situations have been said to exist. The security sector of the Arab World has become the source of political stability because it is the means by which most countries within the World region have been protected against external political influence and attack. In some cases, some of these attacks are actually military attacks that the countries would have suffered from Western invasion if the security systems were not alert and forceful (Sayyid, 2011). As it got manifested in places like Egypt and Libya, the influence of foreign military interventions always leads to the weakening of the political framework of countries to a degree that is often irreparable. It is for this reason that other Arab World countries like Iran that have refused such forms of attacks have been praised as protecting political stability for their countries. It is interesting to note that in some cases, the security sector is made to come to work in protecting and securing the political stabilities of their countries through the defense of internal attacks such as coup d’etat and other forms of rebel led military uprisings. In the same direction, the military system of the Arab World has been blamed in some cases for becoming the sources of political instability in their countries. This is because as much as there have been efforts by some of these armies in thwarting military uprisings and overthrows, there are cases and instances where sitting governments have used military power to suppress the people from enjoying a smooth and resounding democratic political system (Mamdani, 2011). Even when the entire political system is not broken down, the interests and will of the people, which forms of the basis of all political system is taken away from them through the efforts of military forces. A typical example of this is what is currently taking place in Syria, where the government is using strong military force to suppress the people from claiming their will. Even though from a wider view, one may say that an overthrow of the sitting government is what political instability rather is, Abrahms (2012) explained that actual political instability arises when the people are made to no longer have a say in the way in which they should be ruled. Cited Works Abrahms, Max. (2012) ‘The Political Effectiveness of Terrorism Revisited’, Comparative Political Studies, 45 (3): 366-394. Al-Sayyid, Radwan (2003) ‘The Future of Islamic Movements in the Context of Changing Regional and International Conditions’ in The Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research, Islamic Movements – Impact on Political Stability in the Arab World, Abu Dhabi: ECSSR, 171-196 Ghalioun, Burhan and Costopoulos, Philip. (2004) ‘Persistence of Arab Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 15 (4): 126-132. Gramsci, Antonio. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited and translated by Quinton Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith, London: Lawrence and Wishart. Kramer, Gudrun. (2011) ‘Visions of an Islamic Republic: Good Governance according to Islamists’ in Volpi, Frederic (ed.), Political Islam: A Critical Reader, London: Routledge, 85-94. Mamdani, Mahmood. (2011) ‘Good Muslims, Bad Muslims – A political Perspective on Culture and Terrorism’ in Volpi, Frederic (ed.), Political Islam: A Critical Reader, London: Routledge, 109-125. Pape, Robert. (2003) ‘The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism’, American Political Science Review, 97 (3): 344-361. Pupcenoks, Juris. (2012) ‘Democratic Islamisation in Pakistan and Turkey: Lessons for the post Arab-Spring Muslim World’, The Middle East Journal, 66 (2): 273-289. Sayyid, Salman. (2011) ‘The Islamist Impasse?’ in Volpi, Frederic (ed.), Political Islam: A Critical Reader, London: Routledge, 126-134. Read More