Durable, Yet Different: Monarchies in the Arab Spring

Abstract

Over three years into the Arab Spring, the Middle East is characterized by a striking difference in durability between monarchies and republics. Beyond this difference, some significant gaps within the group of the eight Middle East monarchies have so far been overlooked. Drawing on the existing monarchy research, we first make the case that there were three distinct types of durable monarchies prior to the Arab Spring. Confronted with social and political crises, each type reacted differently to the challenges presented to them after 2011. While five "rentier" and "dynastic" Gulf monarchies (Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE (United Arab Emirates)) mainly rely on material distribution and family rule, the non-oil "linchpins" of Jordan and Morocco, attracting additional external funds, undertook constitutional changes in an attempt at procedural legitimation. The Sultanate of Oman, however, falls in between. This "linchtier" monarchy used modest material cooptation, a selected personal reshuffling at the top of the regime as well as targeted institutional adaptations. We illustrate our findings with similarly structured brief case studies of the three prototypes of Qatar, Jordan and Oman.

Monarchies and Republics of the Arab East in the Aftermaths of “Arab Spring”

“…As Bank A., Richter T. & Sunik A. stated "there were three distinct types of durable monarchies in the Middle East prior to the Arab Spring: a first group consisting of the five Gulf monarchies of Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, a second group consisting of the non-Gulf monarchies of Jordan and Morocco and a third, hybrid category, represented by the Sultanate of Oman, which blends some features with the other Gulf monarchies, for example, the oil wealth, and others with Jordan and Morocco, for example, the non-dynastic character of political decision making. Our argument about three distinct types of monarchy supplements the commonly held dualism in Middle East monarchy studies, which typically distinguishes the Gulf monarchies, including Oman, from Jordan and Morocco [1].…”

“…"The eight authoritarian monarchies in the region, in particular, have proved strikingly durable, while a number of heads of state in authoritarian republics (Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Libya) have been ousted. While the phenomenon of widespread monarchical durability is certainly relevant, it tends to obscure the diversity that exists within the group of the eight Arab monarchies" [1].…”

Fluctuating Regional (Dis‐)Order in the Post‐Arab Uprising Middle East

“…In the debate on the Arab Uprisings, it has been emphasized that – with the exception of Bahrain – the uprisings have not posed a substantial threat to the monarchical regimes of the Gulf on the domestic level (Bank et al, ). Mass protests starting in December 2010 in fact endangered the stability of the republics only.…”

Blue blood or true blood: Why are levels of intrastate armed conflict so low in Middle Eastern monarchies?

“…Since the 1970s, the continuing existence of eight Middle Eastern monarchies (Bahrain, Morocco, Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, and Saudi Arabia) has encouraged a large number of researchers to explore monarchical particularities (Bank et al, 2013; Ben-Dor, 2000; Derichs and Demmelhuber, 2014; Hudson, 2014; Lucas, 2014). 7 Several Middle East scholars argue that monarchies are exceptional because they are more legitimate than republics (Albrecht and Schlumberger, 2004; Bank et al, 2014; Schlumberger, 2010; Sedgwick, 2010).…”

“…Middle East scholars have investigated the features that make monarchies special. A number of case studies show that monarchies are more peaceful than republics because royal regimes are more legitimate (Bank et al, 2014; Schlumberger, 2010; Sedgwick, 2010). However, the conflict literature generally overlooks how monarchical features might decrease the likelihood of armed conflict in the Middle East.…”