Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Political Science Theses Department of Political Science Summer 8-11-2015 Barriers to Democracy in the Arab World Mohammad Huweih Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_theses Recommended Citation Huweih, Mohammad, "Barriers to Democracy in the Arab World." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2015. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/political_science_theses/63 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Political Science at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BARRIERS TO DEMOCRACY IN THE ARAB WORLD by MOHAMMAD HUWEIH Under the Direction of Michael Herb, PhD ABSTRACT With the exception of Tunisia, there are no democracies in the Arab world. This paper attempts to the address why that is the case. The paper focuses on some possible answers. Is- lam, oil, and Western intervention are seen as obstacles to democracy. I argue that another factor is being overlooked. These variables may answer the question, but secular elites are the most serous obstacle to democracy in the Arab world. I focus on Algeria and Palestine briefly, showing the secular parties response to electoral defeat and the intervention of the West. I also explore Egypt and Tunisia and the secular elites response to Islamist winning elections. I find that secular elites are an important obstacle to democracy hindrance, but not in all cases. INDEX WORDS: Islamism, Oil, Secular, Democracy, Algeria, Palestine, Tunisia, Egypt, West BARRIERS TO DEMOCRACY IN THE ARAB WORLD by MOHAMMAD HUWEIH A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Art in the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2015 Copyright by Mohammad Jaber Huweih 2015 BARRIERS TO DEMOCRACY IN THE ARAB WORLD by MOHAMMAD HUWEIH Committee Chair: Michael Herb Committee: Syed Rashid Naim Abbas Barzegar Peter Lindsay Electronic Version Approved: Office of Graduate Studies College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University May 2015 iv DEDICATION I dedicate this paper to my heart and soul, Jannah. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 1 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 1 2.1 Oil as a Variable ................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Islam as a Variable............................................................................................... 3 2.3 Western Intervention as a Variable ................................................................... 8 2.4 Secular Elites as a Variable ............................................................................... 11 3 RECENT DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS .............................................................. 13 3.1 Palestine .............................................................................................................. 14 3.2 Algeria ................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 18 4 CASE STUDIES ........................................................................................................ 19 4.1 Egypt ................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 The Role of the Military in Egyptian Society ................................................ 20 4.1.1.1 The Rise of Gamal Abdel Nasser........................................................... 20 4.1.1.2 After Nasser ........................................................................................... 21 4.1.2 The Coup against Mubarak .......................................................................... 22 4.1.2.1 Military Asserts Control ........................................................................ 23 4.1.3 The Judicial Coup ......................................................................................... 25 4.1.4 The Coup Against Morsi ............................................................................... 28 4.1.4.1 The Deep State Response ....................................................................... 29 4.1.4.2 The Secular Response ............................................................................ 30 4.1.4.3 Military/Secular Collaboration .............................................................. 31 4.1.5 Concluding Egypt.......................................................................................... 32 4.2 Tunisia ................................................................................................................. 32 4.2.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 34 4.2.2 Habib Bourguiba .......................................................................................... 35 4.2.3 Zine El Abidine Ben Ali................................................................................. 35 4.2.4 Round One: Transition to Democracy .......................................................... 37 4.2.4.1 Old Regime Institutes ............................................................................ 37 4.2.4.2 Elections ................................................................................................. 38 4.2.5 Round Two: Turmoil ..................................................................................... 40 4.2.5.1 Secular Response ................................................................................... 40 4.2.5.2 Old Regime Response ............................................................................ 42 4.2.5.3 Conclusion of Round Two ..................................................................... 43 4.2.6 Concluding Tunisia ....................................................................................... 44 5 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... 46 6 WORK CITED .......................................................................................................... 47 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to analyze the reasons for the lack of democratic regimes in the Arab world. There are scholars that examine multiple variables to explain the lack of de- mocracy. The variables are oil, Islam, and Western intervention. These variables help to de- scribe why democracy is lacking in the Arab world, but they are not sufficient enough to answer the question. My expected result for this study is that secular elites hinder democracy. Oil, western in- tervention, and Islam as variables can describe the lack of democracy, but it is not the full pic- ture. I believe that secular elites is a stronger factor in explaining the lack of democracy 1 in the Arab world. 2 LITERATURE REVIEW The four variables that may explain the lack of democracy in the Arab world are oil, Islam, western intervention, and secular elites. For the variables oil, Islam, and Western intervention, I do not attempt to prove or disprove whether they hinder democracy, but merely explain what scholars have written about the variables. 2.1 Oil as a Variable The lack of democracy in the Middle East, some scholars argue, is the results of oil Arab countries have. It is the resource curse that hinders democratic movements in the Arab world. The argument that attempts to prove that oil hinders democracy is largely based on regression models and data points. 1 Robert Dahl defines democracy as effective participation, voting equality, knowledge on the issue and its alternatives, control over what issues are placed on the agenda, and all or most adults should be included in the process (36-38). The research done by Michael Ross and others shows that an increase in oil exports does have a negative effect on democracy. It does not, however, have an effect on all countries in the same way. Oil is a wealth generator, the research shows, and affects poorer and undemocratic countries in a different way than it would affect richer democratic countries. Kevin Tsui found that there is a causal link with oil discovery and slow democracy for countries that were previ- ously undemocratic (Tsui). He found that oil discovery does not affect democratic countries in the same way. Similarly, Michael Ross finds a link between poorer countries with oil and lack of democracy. “Barrel for barrel, oil harms democracy more in oil poor countries than in oil-rich ones” (Ross 344). Poor countries that have oil tend to be authoritarian and the prospect of de- mocracy is low. One characteristic of oil that helps empower authoritarian governments is it allows the society to become a rentier state. Rentier, according to Ross, allows the government to derive their wealth from a resource rather then the citizens of the state. This makes the population complacent because they would be taxed little or none at all, making the leaders unaccountable (Ross). Even with a complacent citizenry, the state is able to fund a major security apparatus that would prevent citizens from pushing for