Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Andrew Wigley

GET UPDATES FROM Andrew Wigley

Jordan's Reforms: Dynasties v Demagogues

Posted: 16/08/11 01:00 BST

Another week and another development in the unfolding drama in the Middle East. King Abdullah of Jordan has followed the lead of King Hassan of Morocco in announcing a range of constitutional reforms which, ultimately, will reduce the King's political powers - but by no means curtail them.

The genesis of these reforms, of course, is the Arab Spring. Like Morocco, Jordan hasn't experienced the levels of protest or disturbances that have shaken other Arab nations, but on 14 January Jordanians took to the streets and they have been returning ever since, despite measures such as the King's decision to dismiss an unpopular government in February.

There is, however, something striking about the Jordanian Spring. While protestors have been on the streets, it has rarely been accompanied by significant violence; second, unlike leaders in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and, most recently Syria, King Abdullah is a broadly popular figure, seen as a progressive. However, reforms to date have not gone far enough to assuage the demands of Jordan's youth.

So the lesson is, in recent times Jordan has pursued a more progressive course than most of its Arab neighbours - but it's still not enough. Hence the King's package of reforms which has been designed to head off protestors and meet those demands.

Two distinct courses in the Arab Spring are becoming apparent now. The first is exemplified by Tunisia. Violent uprisings have led to the toppling of regimes (in the case of Libya and Syria the uprisings are still underway). What's now happening in Tunisia and Egypt is a process of establishing the foundations for a pluralist society to emerge; it may not be exactly of the hue that western democracies would but received wisdom tells us its best we leave them to work out their destiny for themselves.

The second course is exemplified by Jordan and Morocco; nations headed by an absolute monarch who recognises the tide of change and, therefore, initiate reforms to satiate the public's appetite for greater political participation and rights. It could serve as a pattern that may (or may not) work in other countries in the region - notably monarchies. And that's the point.

Arab society tends to be proud of its long and culturally rich heritage. Entwined in that heritage is monarchy. Among Arabs, it appears there is broad acceptance and support of monarchs even if there is less support for their politics. As a result Arabs in Morocco, Jordan and the Gulf states of Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the UAE have more forbearance than their counterparts in nations like Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria and Yemen which have endured deeply unpopular demagogic regimes with a distasteful appetite for entitlement.

So while Tunisia is blazing the trial for the region's republics, in the case of the region's more enlightened monarchies, Jordan and Morocco may set an example of meeting the calls for reform while allowing the King to retain a central role in government. Bahrain might yet achieve that, but the signs are ominous and let's not hold our breathe for any meaningful reform in Saudi Arabia without a bloody fight.

It's unlikely the constitutional reforms announced in both Jordan and Morocco will be sufficient in the medium to long term but it is a significant step as the region's monarchs begin to grapple with challenge to their authority.

 

Follow Andrew Wigley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/andrewwigley

 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:44 PM on 08/21/2011
This author is way off the mark in his assessment of both Abdullah and Arab culture, dismissing Arab aspirations in the racist tone that "Monarchy is part of Arab culture." I live in Amman, and the majority of the people despise the Hashemites, but they are too terrified of the US-funded secret police to say so. 80 percent of people live on less than 10 a day in Jordan, one of the world's most expensive country, And everyone is angered at Abdullah's alliance with war criminal Israel, right up to retired Jordanian generals.

Three weeks ago I was at a protest in the Amman Downtown where Jordanian police beat demonstrators who were demanding more accountability for the Parliament. These are on order of the King.

I have no evidence, but given Wigley's experience with "political risk management," he might be a paid PR shill for the royal family in Jordan. What is this guy's middle east credentials? (PHD in the area studies for instance? speak Arabic? Actually interviewed people).
11:37 AM on 08/28/2011
Thanks for the feedback Zayd. I guess what I was trying to highlight is that the uprisings which have deposed leaders so far have taken in place in republics and not constitutional monarchies. It would appear to people like me - and I admit to being less informed than you - that the depth of public anger and level of protest hasn't been as widespread in places like Morocco and Jordan. Why is that? Because the security forces have been more effective at preventing protest, or because they're is not the same depth of feeling as in Egypt or Tunisia? Bahrain is the obvious omission and I make that point in my argument.

But I do I hear your point and sweeping generalisations are never wise so thanks for pulling me up. And just for the record, I'm not a PR man for Jordan or the royal family; just someone who has travelled widely in the region and am fascinated by developments.
04:11 PM on 08/16/2011
Arab society tends to be proud of its long and culturally rich heritage. Entwined in that heritage is monarchy. Among Arabs, it appears there is broad acceptance and support of monarchs even if there is less support for their politics.
----
''Entiwned in that history is monarchy''!!!!

Five centuries of Ottoman Sultanate precede by centuries of Caliphs, Beys and Sheikhs.
I see no kings!
Monarchs are an imperialist imposition.

In my experience, modern Arabs tend towards republicanism. Settling for constitutional monarchy in one or two places, might be advocated by bourgeois moderates who have something to lose.
11:58 AM on 08/28/2011
Thanks for putting me right Eric. You're right, of course. There are some examples such as the House of Saud, and the Moroccan monarchy which are around 250 years old and the Omani crown which is 350 years old. I should not overstate the historical legacy; thanks, too, for pointing out that most monarchies in the region are largely western inventions.
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
12:29 AM on 08/16/2011
"Among Arabs, it appears there is broad acceptance and support of monarchs"

It probably is too early to say and several Arab monarchies crumbled in the past (Egypt 1952, Iraq 1958, Libya 1969). Oil-rich monarchies are more stable, at least for now, since they have the means to bribe their population into submission.