Middle Eastern Monarchies

Many Middle Eastern monarchs lost their thrones to populist nationalist movements. Yet in the 21st century, a handful of monarchies remain and thrive. Because all of the major surviving monarchies are in the Middle East, many writers point to traditional Islamic rule as the key to the survival of these regimes. Among Middle Eastern monarchies, regime-led state formation and nation building have produced a flexible form of rule that has survived the challenges of rapid development and international. Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates are eight countries where monarchs remain in power. These monarchs not only reign but rule, as well. Worldwide, Bhutan and Swaziland are only those countries

“Authoritarian regimes are political systems with limited, not responsible, political pluralism: without elaborate and guiding ideology (but with distinctive mentalities); without intensive or extensive political mobilization (except some points in their development); and in which a leader (or occasionally a small group) exercises power within formally ill-defined limits but actually quite predictable

Populist authoritarian regimes may mobilize large number of social actors, whereas in bureaucratic authoritarian regimes, a narrow society to stay in power. In sultanistic rule, however, the regime stands on a very narrow social base often limited to its clients. The ruler generally buys only the loyalty of these customers, who are generally without distinct social characteristics. Where do Arab monarchies fit into these two contrasting regime types? Mary Ann T´etreault’s discussion of politics in Kuwait demonstrates that Middle Eastern monarchies are a subtype of authoritarian rule rather than examples of sultanistic regimes. T´etreault describes the main contours of Kuwaiti politics in the 20th century with special attention to the 1990s. According to T´etreault, the “main event” of 20th century Kuwaiti politics has been the “repeated clashes between would-be citizens demanding civil and political rights and what has become over the period a deeply entrenched albeit variably autocratic ‘traditional’ regime” (p. 2). Citizens are in conflict with the regime in Kuwait to expand political pluralism while limiting the rulers’ prerogatives. It is not a fight to control a lone dictator the amirs of Kuwait are thus not