1. Towards regime change As we have seen, the region has been immune to successful democratisation, but it has not been immune to processes of democratization. The main question today is: does the Arab Spring constitute a meaningful change of direction? It is worth looking in detail at how processes of democratisation developed and concluded in the past because they can tell us ‘why’ the transition failed and ‘what’ kind of regime emerged from this failure. Lessons for what is taking place today? Empirical evidence shows us that certain countries attempted to democratise. –Tunisia in 1987. Political pact signed by all parties in 1988 to open up the political system. The Islamist party is a growing force and the pact reneged by the President a year later. –Algeria in 1989. Legislative elections called off in 1991 after the first round once it became clear that the Islamist party would win. –Jordan in 1990. Emergency laws are repealed and political participation allowed. When Jordan signs a peace treaty with Israel in 1994, the system is closed off again. –Morocco in 1997. One Islamist party is allowed to run, but the other radical one is not. Alternance fails by 2003 with the upgrading of the authoritarian system.

2. What causes the uprisings? Processes of regime change, whether genuine or stage-managed, have shared sources that tend to be replicated across countries and across time although there are country-specific factors at play as well. The current Arab Spring is also known as the ‘1989’ moment for the Arab world, but we already had a 1989 moment…in circa 1989: –Profound economic crisis not necessarily due to absence of growth….low growth compared to population growth. This is the crucial aspect: not enough jobs. –Profound political crisis due to the rigidity and authoritarianism of the political system. Social and political demands met with either repression of co-optation. No channels to make demands. No emigration. –Distance between the stated principles of governance and the daily reality. –An identity clash between Occidentalised elites and Arab-Muslim sentiment of belonging.

3. The shock to the system How do transitions begin? There is usually a ‘shock’ to the authoritarian system (i.e. an economic crisis) which divides the ruling elites in two camps: hard-liners and soft-liners. The system is opened up to sectors of the opposition: liberalisation phase. –In this phase the opposition emerges and divisions within the opposition also emerge in two distinct camps: radicals and moderates. The ruling elites and the opposition design new rules of the game. Together they set up new institutions and these institutions provide the framework for genuine democratisation. The main trait of this period is: volatility. The current period of political change seems to meet all these criteria. A number of different scenarios are developing.

4. Scenarios Some sort of ‘pacted transition’ whereby sectors of the ruling elites and the opposition design new institutional arrangements that are based on democratic principles in the hope of consolidating democracy and strengthening the changes that have taken place. The case of Tunisia. Some sort of military-led transition to democracy that is slow and tightly controlled in order to allow sectors of the ruling elites to retain economic power. The case of Egypt and possibly Yemen. Some sort of low-intensity civil war whereby an entrenched regime does not conceive of opening up the political system because it would lose enormous privileges. The case of Syria.

5. The survival of authoritarianism A furthering interesting scenario that gives substance to the argument of the survival of authoritarian rule and its ability to regenerate itself is the re-entrenchment of absolute monarchical rule. Some monarchies continue on the path of never-ending democratization that they had begun to walk decades ago: the promise of political change is offset by the need for stability. The cases of Morocco and Jordan. Other monarchies strengthen and renew the social pact they have with their own citizens: economic benefits in exchange for political quietism. The case of Saudi Arabia.