From Iraq to Afghanistan, from Tunisia to Lebanon, elections have failed to solve the problems afflicting the people. As a result, democracy is losing legitimacy

Democracy in the Middle East: Game over?

photo_camera AP/RAHMAT GUL - Islam Qala border with Iran, in western Herat province

In 1881 the great Muslim reformer Muhammad ‘Abduh published an editorial in the Egyptian gazette Al-Waqāʾiʿ al-Miṣriyya which could have been written today. Discussing democracy, he used as an example two countries he considered polar opposites: the United States and Afghanistan. After praising the American democratic system for protecting the rights of its citizens, ‘Abduh advised against trying to implement such a system in the Asian country because, he argued, Afghan voters would only think of the interest of their family and their tribe, and not of the common good. He explained: “Such is the condition of nations that have become accustomed to having the reins of power in the hands of a king, a prince or a vizier who does not have the interest of the nation at heart. … For Afghans to reach the [political] level of Americans, it would take centuries of popularising the sciences, taming the minds, subduing appetites and propagating ideals, in order to generate in the country what is called ‘public opinion’. Only then would be right for Afghanistan what is right for the United States”.

We can object to the idealisation of American democracy, which has had its own difficulties of late. However, the events of the last two decades seem to give credence to ‘Abduh’s questioning of the viability of the democratic system in countries where it has not emerged organically.

A sad appraisal

Let’s begin with the notorious US attempts to export democracy after 9/11: Afghanistan itself, and Iraq. The first gave rise to in a kleptocracy lacking popular support that might not survive without the military backing of its sponsor, as we have been seeing in recent weeks. The second resulted in an almost equally corrupt political system that supressed the Sunni minority, fuelling the emergence of Daesh, and that appears unable to provide electricity and water to citizens currently enduring temperatures that can exceed 50C. 

Miembros de una familia afgana desplazada internamente

Let's continue with the Arab Spring, which inspired so much hope in 2010-11. The Egyptian people got rid of Hosni Mubarak and held elections for which the leftist revolutionaries were not ready and which led to an overwhelming Muslim Brotherhood victory. Predictably, the Islamists displayed authoritarian tendencies and an unwillingness to engage non-religious political forces, e.g. by imposing a new constitution that undermined the rights of women and minorities. After a year in power, the MB were so unpopular that the demonstrations against them were even larger than those that had toppled the dictator two years earlier. A new strongman, then-General Abdelfattah al-Sisi, took the opportunity to seize power.

Despite al-Sisi’s brutal repression of dissent, he obtained the acquiescence of many Egyptians by pointing to the bloody outcome of the revolutions in Libya and Syria. Libyans had risen against Gaddafi, who was lynched by his own people, but the country quickly plunged into a civil war fed by regional and global powers with conflicting agendas which divided and impoverished it. Syrians failed to bring down the Baathist regime, and interference by many of the same powers kept Bashar al-Assad in power and turned what had started as an inclusive political project into a gory jihad.

Imagen de banderas de los Hermanos Musulmanes

More recently, in Tunisia, considered the only success story to come out of the Arab Spring, months of institutional blockage and a dreadful economic and health crisis prompted massive demonstrations that culminated in the removal of the prime minister and the suspension of parliament. President Kais Saied invoked the constitution, which gives him extraordinary powers in case of emergency, and his move seems to enjoy widespread popular support. However, most Tunisian parties and some observers have described his action as a coup, comparing it to the events in Egypt.

Another case to highlight is that of Lebanon, which is experiencing what the World Bank has described as one of the worst economic crises since the mid-19th century. Over the last two years the lira has lost 90 percent of its value, and almost half the Lebanese now live below the poverty line. The explosion in the Beirut port that devastated much of the city a year ago – killing hundreds, injuring thousands, and leaving hundreds of thousands homeless – was a particularly dramatic symptom of the ineptitude and venality of a political class that has remained in power for decades thanks to a “democratic” system based on sectarian quotas.

Manifestantes bloquean una calle durante los enfrentamientos con las fuerzas de seguridad en la ciudad de Ettadhamen, Túnez
The cart before the horse?

All too often, elections in non-Western countries do not result in governments interested in the good of their people. Instead, rulers – democratically elected or not – use power as a path to riches, a tool for patronage and, often, an instrument to favour one segment of the population over the others. Being able to vote every four years means little to those lacking jobs, security, and essential services. The resulting frustration of the citizenry weakens the legitimacy of the democratic system, which becomes identified with corruption, arbitrariness and ineffectiveness. 

The reality is that free elections do not guarantee good governance in the absence of other crucial institutions: Political parties offering ideological alternatives and recognising each other as legitimate, rather than populists that turn politics into a zero-sum game by pretending to speak in the name of God and/or to represent an ethnic or religious community. A thriving civil society, open to dialogue and compromise. Impartial courts that ensure the rule of law. An independent and responsible media allowed to operate freely. And a population with a certain level of education.

Bringing up education can sound derogatory and patronising, especially when many Western educational systems don't seem able to prevent the appearance of anti-science movements and conspiracy theories. However, we must remember that when the US military invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, the illiteracy rate reached two-thirds of the adult population in the former and a quarter in the latter. The figure for Iraq was similar to Egypt’s in 2011, while in Syria around a fifth of adults couldn’t read or write. And even for the literate, education in the region is based on memorisation and repetition and does not promote creativity or critical thinking.

Un manifestante durante una protesta por el desempleo, la corrupción y los servicios públicos deficientes, en Bagdad, Irak, el 2 de octubre de 2019

Countries with low levels of education tend to be poorer, more unequal, and more violent, all of which is not conducive to a healthy political system – which is why ‘Abduh closed his editorial by focusing on this issue: “Our intellectuals, who want our country to imitate Europe, will not succeed. ... Time will pass and the nation will continue in its old state, even though it could have achieved a better state had it been allowed to follow its natural evolution. Whoever wants the good of the country only has to improve its education; after that, the rest will follow”.

In conclusion, interfering in other countries’ affairs or, worse, trying to impose a certain way of doing things not only does not work but is likely to backfire. In contrast, assisting in education development and access to modern information and communication technologies can be an effective means of contributing to the organic emergence of a democratic system.

More in Politics