Volume 36, Number 2, January 2004
Special Issue on Enduring Authoritarianism: Lessons from the Middle East for Comparative Theory
Marsha Pripstein Posusney, "Enduring Authoritarianism: Middle East Lessons for Comparative Theory"
Largely because the Middle East has defied global trends toward democratization, it has been marginalized in the field of comparative politics. The articles in this special issue argue that nondemocratic regimes like those in the Middle East can serve as counterexamples to enhance explanations of the factors that contribute to democratic transitions and that perpetuate authoritarian rule. The articles eschew cultural explanations and advance instead propositions that spotlight political-institutional variables, such as the rules governing party recognition, electoral competition, nongovernmental organizations, and military professionalization. They also emphasize the strategic choices made by incumbent authoritarian rulers and both religious and secular opposition challengers.
Eva Bellin, "The Robustness of Authoritarianism in the Middle East: Exceptionalism in Comparative Perspective"
Explanations of the robustness of authoritarianism in the Middle East and North Africa have focused on absent prerequisites of democratization in the region, including weak civil society, state-dominated economies, poor socioeconomic performance, and nondemocratic culture. By contrast, the region’s enduring authoritarianism can be attributed to the robustness of the coercive apparatus in many Middle Eastern and North African states and to this apparatus’s exceptional will and capacity to crush democratic initiatives. Cross-regional comparison suggests factors both external and internal to the region that account for this exceptional strength.
Ellen Lust-Okar, "Divided They Rule: The Management and Manipulation of Political Opposition"
How do state-created institutions influence government-opposition relations during prolonged economic crises? Different experiences in Morocco and Jordan challenge the widespread notion that economic crises promote political opposition. While the opposition in Jordan consistently demanded reform, the opposition in Morocco initially challenged the regime but then became unwilling to challenge it further as the crisis continued. Different institutional structures explain these strategies. In Jordan formal institutions did not promote divisions between opposition groups, and opposition elites were more likely to mobilize political unrest. In Morocco incumbent elites divided political opposition into loyalist and radical camps, and the loyalist opposition became unwilling to mobilize unrest.
Vickie Langohr, "Too Much Civil Society, Too Little Politics: Egypt and Liberalizing Arab Regimes"
Advocacy nongovernmental organizations have led major antiauthoritarian campaigns in many liberalizing Arab regimes because of the weakness of opposition parties. Their actions bode poorly for democratization because they are structurally incapable of sustaining successful campaigns against determined authoritarian regimes. To explain the weakness of opposition to Arab authoritarianism, it is necessary to examine the conditions that promote the expression of opposition through nongovernmental organizations rather than parties. These conditions include both severe limitations on party mobilization, the financial poverty of most opposition parties, and the dramatic increase in donor funds for advocacy nongovernmental organizations.
Carrie Rosefsky Wickham, "The Path to Moderation: Strategy and Learning in the Formation of Egypt's Wasat Party"
What prompts radical opposition leaders to abandon their ultimate goals and accommodate themselves to competitive politics? Many studies portray ideological moderation as contingent on a broader process of democratization. Recent change in the public goals of some Islamists in Egypt suggest that more limited political openings can also facilitate moderation. They can generate new incentives for strategic moderation and create new opportunities for political learning, or change in political actors’ core values and beliefs. Prodemocratic learning is most likely when institutional openings create incentives and opportunities for radical opposition leaders to break out of the ideologically insular networks of movement politics and enter into sustained dialogue and cooperation with other opposition groups.
Michele Penner Angrist, "Party Systems and Regime Formation in the Modern Middle East: Explaining Turkish Exceptionalism"
Why have electoral politics emerged in Turkey and nowhere else in the postcolonial Middle East? The nature of nascent indigenous party systems significantly affected the type of political regimes that developed after Middle East states gained their independence in the mid twentieth century. Three variables – the number of parties and the presence or absence of policy polarization and mobilizational symmetry in party systems – explain regime outcomes and help shed light on Turkey’s political exceptionalism. Party system characteristics, treated as the dependent variable, offer an explanation for much of the variance across the region.