Scientific Essay from the year 2009 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Region: Near East, Near Orient, grade: 75%, Dublin City University, course: International Relations, language: English, abstract: The region of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) appears to be an exception when it comes to the persistence of authoritarianism. Whereas most other regions in the world have embarked upon a path of democratisation, trends in the MENA appear to be adverse. Not only is the MENA's record appalling in terms of electoral democracies, but the region, on average, has not experienced an improvement in civil liberties and political rights for the last thirty years. This paper will look at two aspects concerning the persistence of authoritarianism in the region. The principal aim will be to analyse what the principle cause for the persistence of authoritarianism in the MENA is. A secondary objective will be to establish whether the term MENA exceptionalism is applicable, or whether the persistence of authoritarianism in the region can be explained through general theories on the subject. The paper analyses the reasons why scholars deem the MENA to be exceptional, and which variables they believe contribute to the persistence of authoritarianism in the region. Those arguments are then refuted, arguing instead that rentierism is the principal independent variable with regards to the robustness of authoritarian regimes in the MENA. The focus then shifts to the concept of rentierism in general and more specifically its relation to oil rich countries. Finally the paper looks at how oil poor countries also benefit from rents and how it is possible that levels of authoritarianism in oil rich countries are not hugely affected by oil price fluctuations.

Examines new authoritarian practices and state control in MENA countries to target and neutralise dissidents

Stephen J. King considers the reasons that international and domestic efforts toward democratization have failed to take hold in the Arab world. Focusing on Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and Algeria, he suggests that a complex set of variables characterizes authoritarian rule and helps to explain both its dynamism and its persistence. King addresses, but moves beyond, how religion and the strongly patriarchal culture influence state structure, policy configuration, ruling coalitions, and legitimization and privatization strategies. He shows how the transformation of authoritarianism has taken place amid shifting social relations and political institutions and how these changes have affected the lives of millions. Ultimately, King's forward-thinking analysis offers a way to enhance the prospects for democracy in the Middle East and North Africa.

The works collected in The Lure of Authoritarianism consider the normative appeal of authoritarianism in light of the 2011 popular uprisings in the Middle East. Despite what seemed to be a popular revolution in favor of more democratic politics, there has instead been a slide back toward authoritarian regimes that merely gesture toward notions of democracy. In the chaos that followed the Arab Spring, societies were lured by the prospect of strong leaders with firm guiding hands. The shift toward normalizing these regimes seems sudden, but the works collected in this volume document a gradual shift toward support for authoritarianism over democracy that stretches back decades in North Africa. Contributors consider the ideological, socioeconomic, and security-based justifications of authoritarianism as well as the surprising and vigorous reestablishment of authoritarianism in these regions. With careful attention to local variations and differences in political strategies, the volume provides a nuanced and sweeping consideration of the changes in the Middle East in the past and what they mean for the future.

Taking a comparative approach, this book considers the ways in which political regimes have changed since the Arab Spring. It addresses a series of questions about political change in the context of the revolutions, upheavals and protests that have taken place in North Africa and the Arab Middle East since December 2010, and looks at the various processes have been underway in the region: democratisation (Tunisia), failed democratic transitions (Egypt, Libya and Yemen), political liberalisation (Morocco) and increased authoritarianism (Bahrain, Kuwait, Syria). In other countries, in contrast to these changes, the authoritarian regimes remain intact (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Arab United Emirates.

Why have social spending levels and social policy trajectories diverged so drastically across labour-abundant Middle Eastern and North African regimes? And how can we explain the marked persistence of spending levels after divergence? Using historical institutionalism and a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods Social Dictatorships: The Political Economy of the Welfare State in the Middle East and North Africa develops an explanation of social spending in authoritarian regimes. It emphasizes the importance of early elite conflict and attempts to form a durable support coalition under the constraints imposed by external threats and scarce resources. Social Dictatorships utilizes two in-depth case studies of the political origins of the Tunisian and Egyptian welfare state to provide an empirical overview of how social policies have developed in the region, and to explain the marked differences in social policy trajectories. It follows a multi-level approach tested comparatively at the cross-country level and process-traced at micro-level by these case studies.

Explores the persistence of authoritarian rule in the Middle East, eschewing cultural explanations and focusing on the role of political institutions and strategies.