Council for a Community of Democracies

CCD Board Member Larry Diamond Discusses the State of Democracy in the Middle East
February 16, 2010
By: Randi Zung

In the January 2010 issue ofthe Journal of Democracy, founding co-editor and CCD Board Member, Larry Diamond questions why democracy has continually failed to be established within the Middle East. Diamond states that democracy has seemingly spread to every other region of the world since 1974, but that democratic growth in the Middle East has remained stagnant – noting that there is not a single Arab democracy. The Middle East, in which Diamond refers to, is composed of nineteen countries.

Diamond states that the democracy deficit in the Middle East is often attributed to cultural and religious difference, but asserts that those common misgivings are not the real reason for why democracy has failed to take root. Diamond also dismisses ethnic divisions as an impediment to democracy, stating that the countries of Egypt and Tunisia are, for the most part, ethnically homogenous and non-democratic. In addition, Diamond cites that the explanation of ethnic divisions is false because the countries of Iraq and Lebanon are the closest to resembling a “full electoral democracy,” and have ethnically diverse populations. Diamond notes that democracy is not only widely supported by Middle Eastern citizens, but that many of them believe that democracy is the most ideal political governance practice. While there is evidence that shows Middle Easterners are excited for democracy, electoral fraud and misconduct can significantly decrease voter turnout.

While Diamond dismisses Islam, itself, as a reason why democracy has failed to take hold in the Middle East, he does mention that religious belief plays an important role in daily life. Diamond states that the Arab Barometer, a research organization part of the University of Michigan, concluded that Middle Easterners believed that democratic governance needed a religious influence. In this instance, secular democracy is not a favorable option. On the other hand, Islamic democracy is not ideal due to the fact that it could fail to address minority voices and concerns. For Middle Easterners who do advocate for secular democracy, Diamond states that their socio-economic subjectivity causes them to create a false dichotomy between the existence of secular democracies and authoritarian regimes. Diamond suggests that these individuals envision that any form of religiously influenced democracy will automatically lead to an authoritarian regime. Diamond believes that this all-or-nothing mentality is why democracy has failed to progress within the Middle East.

Economic development plays another key factor in the limit of the spread of democracy. While Diamond notes that many Middle Eastern countries have comparable per capita incomes with other countries around the globe, he states that the wealth distribution is heavily skewed. In this instance, Diamond proposes that the issue is not actually economic development, but the economic structures of countries. Diamond notes that many of the oil-rich countries do not tax their citizens and instead rely on oil revenue as a source of government funding. In this instance, citizen involvement is reduced and individuals become indifferent to their governments. As a result, the aforementioned oil revenue becomes squandered and citizen participation becomes further nullified through the distortion of a nation’s entire economic base and superstructure.

In addition to religious and economic factors, democratic growth within the Middle East has also been hindered by the presence of authoritarian regimes. While present in other parts of the world, Diamond notes that authoritarian regimes in the Middle East have become especially refined because governments spend large sums of money on security and intelligence operations. Authoritarian control is now covert and structural, not outright oppressive. The presence of authoritarian regimes also means that there is little room for citizens to be politically involved.

Diamond identifies geopolitics as his final obstacle. He states two significant ongoing political happenings as reasons for why democracy has failed to develop. The first reason he cites is the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict, which causes negative shockwaves throughout all aspects of economic, political, and social life. The second reason is the perpetuation of authoritative states, which reinforce and backup the existence of each other’s regimes.

In closing, Diamond states that he believes democracy will flourish thanks to changing United States foreign policy priorities, and the increased prevalence of social networking media and freedom of press. In addition, Diamond asserts that the potential emergence of a single democratic Middle Eastern country could serve as a regional role model to encourage other countries to transition. Diamond also theorizes that a decline in oil revenue could force countries to consider making the transition to democracy.

Source:

Journal of Democracy - Why Are There No Arab Democracies?