In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Islam and Democracy in the Middle East
  • Jamal R. Nassar
Islam and Democracy in the Middle East Larry Jay Diamond, Marc F. Plattner, and Daniel Brumberg , eds. Baltimore,MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003322 pp., $25.00 (paper)

This volume addresses an important subject from many angles. It asks the question, Why is the Middle East the only region that remains largely untouched by the wave of global democratization? Thirty chapters authored by some well-known scholars attempt to find answers. The title of the book, however, could be misleading. The real topic of discussion is democracy in the Middle East and North Africa, although the title is Islam and Democracy in the Middle East. Some chapters clearly deal with Islam and democracy, eleven to be exact. But we all know that Islam and the Middle East are not necessarily the same. With this note aside, this volume represents a wonderful addition to the literature.

The very first chapter, "A Record of Failure," by a Tunisian historian, Mohamed Talbi, gives the reader a frank overview of the nature of Arab regimes. Examples from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and other Arab states document a record of corruption and personalism that is prevalent in the Arab world. This brief chapter gives the reader an entry to a very useful volume on the failure of democracy in the Arab states. Clearly, Islam is not the reason for the failure. Rather, it has to do with alienating, degrading, and corrupting dictatorships ruling people who are thoroughly subjugated.

The rest of the volume presents a rather comprehensive assessment of this staying power of Arab autocracies. Some two dozen Western and Middle Eastern scholars dissect the attempts at political liberalization and investigate, sometimes in case studies, forces pushing for more civil liberties, meaningful elections, and a more open and pluralistic vision of Islam. Although the literature is full of writings that assert the notion of incompatibility between Islam and democracy, this volume does not accept that argument. Nor does the volume accept the argument that economic development is necessary to sustain democracy. In fact, it is pointed out that a number of non-Arab Islamic states that have low levels of economic development have at least minimal electoral democracies.

If Islam is not the obstacle and if economic development is not a hindrance to democracy in the Arab world, then what is? That is the basic substance of the book. The various authors have differing responses. A couple of themes are found throughout, however. The first relates to autocratic rulers who fear loss of power. The second explains that the opposition in many of the affected states is weak and ineffective. Although these are significant factors in the absence of democracy in the Arab states, they are lacking another reason: the role of outside powers. This is where this reviewer finds the volume lacking. Even if the Saudi rulers did not fear loss of power and Saudi opposition was well organized and strong, would outside powers with influence accept an electoral democracy in Saudi Arabia? The answer is not simple, but the question needed to be posed somewhere in this important volume.

It is understandable that autocrats, and other rulers, do not willingly commit political suicide. In the Arab states, autocrats often outlive predictions of their demise. Their natural fear of democracy is coupled with a fierce dependence on the tools of power to subvert any forces of opposition. The leaders' rise to power is often the result of ruthless acts and their rule, consequently, must remain equally ruthless. Otherwise, the fate they imposed on their predecessors might become theirs.

Ruthless leaders also generate opposition. The opposition in such states is severely limited and must go underground or moderate itself to whispers of reform if it is to survive. In the absence of legitimate means of political expression, the opposition often finds itself either engaged in [End Page 503] extralegal means or aspiring for legitimacy from the existing regime. That creates a dilemma for any opposition. If they go underground, they find it difficult to effect change or they might discredit the whole change project by carrying out acts that de-legitimize their cause...

pdf

Share