The Arab World

Whereas Western Europe has made a massive stride towards political and economic union, and Asia has been experiencing a remarkable economic rise, the Arabs are still suffering from all kinds of stagnation and war. Arab glory with their long and proud history has gone, and only dictatorship, violence and diplomatic stalemate with Israel are left.

The image of Arab countries is often linked to all kinds of sufferings. Ruled by authoritarian governments, people rarely have chance to strive for personal freedom. The governments are notorious for their records of suppressing human rights, and the over-powerful internal security forces menacing its own people. Despite their oil, two out of five people in the Arab world still live on less than $2 per day, struggling to survive slightly above the poverty line. And until the conflict with Israel is solved, the fear of war will not stop haunting Arabs.

In the absence of democracy, Arab states rely on the extraordinary degree of suppression in order to stay in power. However, can regimes that are failing their people so clearly hold sway over some 350 million people indefinitely? People have been asking this question for decades, but we still see hardly any sign of change. The speed of democratic progress depends on the Arabs themselves, but the image of democracy has been tainted by George Bush for invading Iraq.

Economic growth, in opinion of many political scholars, is a possible engine to drive democracy development. It will produce an educated and entrepreneurial middle class with a strong demand for controlling their own fate. And as the power of the middle class grows, even the most autocratic governments will be forced to give in. Indeed, according to the “Economist”, economic growth and decreasing fertility in many Arab states have lead to the better education of their people, and demands for a bigger say in economies.

China’s experience, however, is a counter example to the idea that economic growth would inevitably lead to democratic development. In fact, for most of the people, democracy itself is an ambiguous notion; whereas what people really care about is a prosperous, stable and free country that democracy promises to bring. So if a country, such as China, which has brought their people a wealthier life and a certain level of personal as well as political freedom, and with political suppression only targeting a few specific people, then why democracy? In this case, it is quite understandable that people might prefer the political stagnation to the chaos that change might bring, and therefore autocrats can cut the cord between economic growth and democracy. Authoritarian rule in Arab countries is so ingrained that democratic change would be a huge leap. Even if we can expect further economic improvement, the chances of democracy are still impossible to predict.