Written by: Prof. Daniel Brumberg Published in: Journal of Democracy Volume 13, Number 4 October 2002

In this paper Brumberg made an analysis of the political behavior of the Middle East Arab regimes in the eighties and nineties.

Brumberg interpreted a cycle in which Arab regimes are moving away from authoritarianism towards more "liberalized autocracies" as he called it and then back towards more "deliberalization". Liberalized Autocracies Deliberalization

Liberalized Autocracy is a mixture of: guided pluralism controlled elections selective repression. These "survival strategies” are *adopted by the authoritarian regimes * serve the survival of their regimes rather than aiming at real democratization

What determines moving towards either "liberalized autocracies" or "deliberalization" ? Brumberg called this process “The threat perception" a balancing act where the partial authoritarian rulers are narrowing or widening the boundaries of political openness in response to what they see as factors challenging their regimes. Thus allowing some opposition power but this power must never reach the point where it can be used as a threat to these rulers.

These liberalized autocracies achieve stability through high costs. Cultural, Religious, Ideological dissonance is used to divide opposition. Some arrangements are made through which: *partial autocracies give some Islamist oppositionists voice in the parliament, the cabinet or give them some ideological or institutional control (Islamization) Thus creating circumstances under which free elections could make illiberal Islamists the dominant opposition voice, leaving democrats whether Islamists or secularists (divide and rule tactics).

 Countries moving towards “deliberalization”  Egypt, Jordan, Yemen  WHY?  1-adopted structural eco. reforms  2- Islamists movements that are getting stronger  3- failure of Palestinian Israeli peace process  Countries moving towards “liberalized autocracy”  Qatar, Bahrain, Morocco  WHY?  they are no longer gaining the support they used to buy through the petroleum revenues due to the hard economic times they are witnessing.  BUT  may decide to move back to deliberalization if their Islamist oppositionists score a large victory.

Brumberg also gave examples of total autocracies: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Tunisia. Total autocracy is the exception not the rule in Arab world. These regimes have three conditions: 1-Oil money 2- They derive their legitimacy through defending certain idea (defending the unified nation or the Islamic community) 3- The powerful organizations created to repress rival political voices (security agencies). Yet the more force is used the more grows the revenge-seeking enemies.

Brumberg concluded that moving from liberalized autocracy to competitive democracy is improbable. The survival strategies, which have boosted Islamists, made it hard for even reformers with best intensions to envision different future than gradual reforms

Conclusion The best solution lies in gradualism through promoting -Independent judiciaries -Effective political parties -Competitive internationally observed elections -Representative parliaments -The rule of law. These changes will demand: -First: bold initiatives from Arab rulers -Second: U.S. readiness to support democratic gradualism by pressing its Arab allies.