Civil Society Activities in the Arab World

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the activities of civil societies in the Arab world. Our review is inspired by research studies that have shown a lack of vibrancy in civil society activities in the Middle East. Using the constructivist theory as our main theoretical framework, we highlight an undeniable link between civil society activities and democracy. Through this analysis, we find that civil society organizations fail to thrive in the Middle East because of the absence of democracy. We also discover that the western conception of civil society and the Arab conception of the same are fundamentally different. This is why we cannot translate the same success of civil rights groups in western countries to Arab countries.

In other words, the social, political, cultural, and economic dynamics of Arab countries significantly differ from those in the west. This is the main point of discussion in this paper because we demonstrate that there are different conceptualizations of civil society in both western and Arabian circles of governance. In the western circles, civil society actions and groups are often measured based on their role as instruments of democratic safeguards or transitions. Comparatively, Arab citizens conceptualize civil society groups in the context of promoting pro-Arabic principles. From this review, we argue that the failure to understand the cultural and religious dynamics of Arabs obscures our understanding of the real actions and place of civil society in the Middle East.

Introduction

Researchers have had different conceptualizations of civil society groups based on contextual factors, such as the type of political environment they operate in and the kinds of people they represent (Alagappa 224; Liebert and Trenz 24). Nonetheless, abstractly, civil society is a group of non-state actors in a country’s political and governance system who advocate for the respect of the will of the people (Soares 1). The concept of civil society also stretches to private individuals and the family. This means that this society could be devoid of government and business.

Some researchers have linked the notion of civil society with democratic principles and values, such as the freedom of speech, freedom of association, and an independent judiciary (among other pillars of democracy) (Alagappa 224; Liebert and Trenz 24). Based on such assertions, the definitions of civil society are contextual. This is why different regions have variations of the concept. For example, in Eastern and Central Europe, the concept of civil society emerges as an embodiment of civil values (Salam 6). Adam Michnik and other European dissidents of the politics of civil society support this view (Salam 6-8).

Civil societies often generate political and social ideologies that would spearhead development in different areas of governance. Such societies may be working to make a profit or not. The relationship between politics and civil society or the relationship between civil society and business stems from the interaction between civil society groups and people who own factors of production (mostly business people and politicians) (Soares 1). Generally, the concept of civil society is characterized by many controversies surrounding its construction and implementation. These controversies increased during the end of the socialist regime in Eastern Europe, where civil society groups played an instrumental role in changing the political and governance structures of the region.

The focus on Eastern Europe alone highlights variations in the application of the concept. This is why Soares says, “It is not ultimately clear where the concept of civil society comes from, and it also lacks a clear and sharp interpretation because of its diverse application” (1). According to the definition of Schubert and Klein (qtd, in Soares 1), the concept of civil society tried to avoid the extremes of socialism and capitalism by rejecting the extreme individualism that characterizes most western societies and the extreme politicization of almost all aspects of human life, as is witnessed in most socialist countries. This statement alone, in part, highlights the basis for which different societies review the roles of the civil society.

There has been a difference in the activities of civil society groups in western countries and Middle Eastern countries. The relative inactivity of civil society groups in the Arab world has dominated mainstream discussions about the place of such groups in a rapidly globalizing society (Browers 205). This paper reviews the role of civil society in the Middle East and explains why they are less vibrant compared to their counterparts in other parts of the world. Our discussion is based on the constructivist theory, which is premised on the idea that people’s experiences change based on their experiences. A deeper understanding of this theoretical framework appears below.

Theoretical Framework

The constructivist theory is a theme we will use in this paper to understand the place of civil society in the Middle East. This theoretical framework is enshrined in the principle that governance is an active process where societies construct new ideas and concepts based on their experiences regarding an issue (Forst 232). Relying on a cognitive structure, this theory posits that people develop new knowledge of specific political or governance issues by using transformative information. Researchers who have used the constructivist theory to investigate the actions of civil society groups have exposed two major types of ethical issues. The first one relates to the ideological view of researchers when they investigate their actions and how their bias could influence how they conduct their studies (methodological issues, formulation of research questions, and the likes (Chandra 301).

The second one concerns the ethics of conducting research on marginalized communities, or societies, which are poorly understood, or those that do not share the same identity as those of mainstream researchers (Chandra 417). This second concern has outlined the main issue that characterizes our review because the Middle East is a poorly understood society in western educational circles. Furthermore, many western-styled researchers poorly understand the relationship between the cultural dynamics of Middle East societies and their political and governance structures. This is partly the reason why there has been a conflict between how western researchers understand the role of the civil society in the Middle East and how researchers from the Middle East explain the same issue. Based on these insights, in this paper, we use the constructivist approach to explain civil society in the Arab World. However, before doing so, we explain the role of civil society.

What is the Role of the Civil Society?

In the 21^st century, the role of civil society has grown exponentially. Indeed, its legal and material influences have grown and increased in dominance in the Arab world as many researchers are starting to explore the nature, characteristics, and roles of such societies in Middle Eastern politics (United Nations 3-4). Although some skeptics have reacted negatively to the increased focus on the role of the civil society in the Middle East, few disagree with the importance of this society in the region (Hamzawy 7-9).

Most researchers have used western definitions and roles of the civil society in western countries to gauge the role and importance of the civil society in the Arab world (Akbarzadeh 122-124). Observers have had different views about this issue. For example, Hamzawy (18) says that the use of western ideals and perceptions of the civil society to evaluate the actions of civil society groups in the Arab world is a wrong approach because both regions have fundamentally different conceptualizations of civil society. Relative to this argument, the United Nations (24) says that the notion of civil society in the Arab world should be evaluated with historical and cultural sensitivity.

Civil societies have played an instrumental role in promoting democratic ideals in many countries. This is the main ideology of informing how western governments perceive the role of civil society in the world (Wiarda 15). Rightfully so, under the right conditions, civil societies could greatly contribute to the democratization of repressive governance systems. Their actions could also help to sustain democratic ideals once they are established in specific countries. This contribution comes as no surprise because researchers have documented different episodes when the United States (US) government has supported or funded civil society groups around the world to entrench democracy in countries that are deemed undemocratic or authoritarian (Akbarzadeh 58).

For example, the Carnegie Foundation has documented instances where the Bush administration funded and supported civil society groups in Iraq to entrench democracy in the country (Hawthorne 3). The US has applied the same policy in different countries, including the Philippines, and some eastern European countries. Evidence also exists in western countries applying the same approach in South Africa, Serbia, and recently Georgia (Hawthorne 3). Through the activities and support of civil society groups, citizens have found a voice to stand up to their governments and carve out a unique political space for themselves. Hawthorne says these civil society groups have helped people “to learn about democracy, to articulate a democratic alternative to the status quo, to spread this idea within the society, and to mobilize millions of their fellow citizens against repressive regimes” (5).

Since civil society organizations are mostly associated with western ideals about democracy and the concept of promoting people power, state-sponsored civil rights programs around the world (usually championed by the US and the major European powers) have become a toolkit for western countries to impart democratic ideals around the world (Salam 6-8). Therefore, it comes as no surprise that many western countries see civil society actions as a solution for eliminating authoritarian rule in many Arab nations. However, civil rights groups operating in Arab countries have had a different experience from those operating in western countries. A deeper discussion of this fact appears below.

Civil Society in the Arab World

When investigating the role of the civil society in the Arab world, it is important to ask concrete questions about its legitimacy and conceptualization, not in the context of the western society, but in the context of the Arab society. Elbayar (1-2) proposes a European model for investigating the differences between the western concept of civil society and the Arab conceptualization of the same. He argues that this model is useful because it helps us understand the historical and theoretical foundations of both conceptions of civil society (Elbayar 1-2). Such a comparison is useful to our analysis and would help consumers of the model (in the Arab) world to provide a new framework of civil society actions that are culturally sensitive and relevant to people who live in the Middle East.

Many Arab-based researchers have proposed different conceptualizations of the concept of civil society (Akbarzadeh 58). Nonetheless, some of their definitions are inconsistent and provide a misguided view of the concept. These challenges exist because the researchers rely largely on the conceptualizations of the concept from western societies. In other words, instead of seeking to find the origin of the concept from within the Middle East context, they largely rely on the conceptualizations of the concept based on how they work in western societies. Elbayar (1-2) provides a solution to this problem by saying that the true relevance and meaning of the civil society in the Arab world should be sought through an understanding of how civil society is relevant in the Arabic Language.

To explain the origin of the civil society, Elbayar says, “In the phrase civil “al-mujtama,” the word “al-mujtama” stems from “Mujtama,” which refers to the place and time where the meeting “itjima” the amongst society members (mujtame) took place” (1). This statement in itself presents the concept of civil society as a group of people who live under the same rules and regulations. Of importance in this definition is the understanding that the Arabic definition of the civil society differs from the Western conception of the same because the former does not try to define the relationship between individuals and the organizing institutions or governments that exercise authority.

A deeper insight into the term “civil” in Arabic shows a strong correlation with the term “Madanee,” which simply means a transition from a state of primitiveness to civility, which is described by a state of familiarity and delight in a social setting (Drysdale145). Simply, this concept means that the term civil society, in the Arabic sense of the word, refers to a state of transition from a rural setting to an urban setting. Of importance to note in the Arabic understanding of civil society is the omission of political influences from the concept. In other words, the Arabic conception of civil society does not necessarily mean influencing how people live in urban settings. Many researchers have failed to understand this difference when striving to understand how civil society works in the Arab world, or even how Arabs would conceive the concept.

History of Civil Society in Arab Nations

Many researchers have argued that civil society groups are alien to Arab nations. However, some of them disagree with this view by saying that this statement is myopic in nature because researchers who argue this way do not understand the history of the Middle East because they narrow their review to how western societies conceive the concept of the civil society (Eltaweel 3 – 4). Researchers such as Liebert and Trenz (24), say researchers who advance the view that civil societies are alien to the Arab world are mostly orientalists, such as Bernard Lewis and Daniel Pipes.

These researchers have often argued that civil societies have never existed in the Arab world because of the religious influence of Islam, which has often promoted the unity of the Umma (Unity among Muslims). Professor Benoit Challand (qtd. in Liebert and Trenz 24), among other researchers, has argued that such views are misleading because such researchers do not have the authentic knowledge about the Middle East. He also argues that civil society is a broad concept that should not only be narrowed down to non-governmental organizations, or non-state actors, who are financed by the UN and other rich countries to influence political processes in Arab nations (Eltaweel 4).

As a counter argument, these researchers suggest that civil society groups have existed in the Middle East since the fall of the Ottoman Empire, centuries ago (Alagappa 224; Liebert and Trenz 24). According to Elbayar (1-2), Arab countries have witnessed the activities of civil society groups in different phases of their history. The first one was in the early 20^th century after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The second phase was in the European Colonialism period. The third phase was during the post-colonialism phase and during the time when many Arab nations were getting their independence. The fourth phase was during the rise of authoritarian regimes and the establishment of quasi democracies dotted around the Middle East. The first phase of civil society actions happened when Ottoman reforms were taking place in Arab countries (Browers 205).

At the time, there were several nationalist movements in Turkey and other Arab nations. People who were being ruled by the Ottoman Empire were at the turning point of political, social, and economic reforms, brought about by the advent of “modernity.” Here, citizens were introduced to the first forms of civil society, which was mainly composed of small community-based groups, such as guilds and religious charity communities (Hamzawy 7-9). Educational institutions funded by Islamic Waafs (endowments) also formed part of the civil society groups in the region (Hamzawy 7-9). During the European colonialism period, civil society groups in the Arab world were in the form of associations, or professional groups. Trade unions and secular charities, cultural clubs and Islamic organizations were other forms of civil society groups operating in the region. In fact, it is during this period that the Muslim Brotherhood emerged (Eltaweel 3 – 4). Most of the civil right groups were active in the Middle East in ways that other groups had not been. They also played an important role in nationalistic struggles in many Arab states in ways that promoted a pan-Arab cause.

In the post-colonial period of Arabic resurgence, some Arab rulers were uncomfortable with the growth of these civil rights groups. For example, Nasser’s regime tightened its grip on the Muslim Brotherhood during the 1950s because it feared that it would undermine its power and control over its subjects (Eltaweel 3 – 4). It was during this time that independent civic activity was suppressed by different regimes in the Middle East (Drysdale145-146). In fact, most governments took it upon themselves to bring these civil right groups under state control. Those that survived were repressed. There was relative liberalization and diversification of civil right activities in the Middle East after this period.

Take the case of Egypt, for example, which witnessed an increase in the number of civil rights activities during the 1980s (Eltaweel 3 – 4). Many rulers of Mubarak’s caliber gave these civil rights groups political and economic pseudo liberalization to legitimize their forms of governments. However, most of their activities were symbolic in the sense that few actual democratic and political reforms were achieved. This has been the main talking point for researchers who have argued that the civil rights movement has failed to “take off” in the Middle East (Alagappa 224; Liebert and Trenz 24). According to this analysis, the point of differentiation between western-styled researchers and Middle East researchers is the conception of what civil society actually entails, at least in the context of the Arabic and Western definitions of the same entail.

Democracy and Civil Society

Many people know that the Arab world is not a center of democracy in the world. In fact, many researchers say that the Middle East and many Arab nations are anti-democracy and prefer to stay under totalitarian or dictatorial rule (Boose 310). This view is supported by several Orientalists who argue that Arab nations are incapable or democratizing their systems of governance because of their religious beliefs and cultural norms. However, as we will see in this paper, democracy shares a close relationship with the civil society.

Regardless of people’s perception of democracy and its importance in different societies, Romaniuk and Marlin (129-130) argue that the peaceful change of rulers and the separation of powers between different institutions of government are essential in the efficient and stable running of any modern society. Based on this assertion, it is difficult for the civil society to thrive in the absence of democracy because of the undue influence that totalitarianism, or dictatorships, would exert on their activities (Romaniuk and Marlin 118). Therefore, civil society and democracy are mutually dependent because one cannot exist without the other. In the absence of civil society, the state becomes a mere tool for exerting the influence of the elites, or those in power (Kim 139). This analysis brings our attention to the place of democracy in the Arab world because as Romaniuk and Marlin observe, “When it comes to democracy, Arab states are on a different level” (130).

Democracy thrives in societies where people are free. Through such freedoms, the civil society is able to interact well with other institutions and the people are able to respect the work of these societies. Based on this assertion, the civil society emerges as a catalyst, or even a building block, for societies that respect democracy or want to improve their version of it (Romaniuk and Marlin 63). Some researchers have even gone a step further to present the civil society as democracy’s lifeline (Romaniuk and Marlin 129-130). Metaphorically, it is like the caring mother who safeguards the growth and prosperity of democracy (Boose 310). In other words, it protects the people from obstacles and setbacks. Therefore, it is difficult for democracy to thrive without the civil society and it is similarly impractical for the civil society to thrive without democracy.

Boose (310) has investigated the relationship between democracy and the civil society in the Arab world by reviewing the political and social influences of the Arab Spring on major Middle Eastern countries. He says that although the Arab Spring brought hope to millions of people that democracy would soon prevail in the Middle East, recent events have proved that this trend is unlikely to happen and authoritarian governments would still rule most Middle Eastern countries. Boose (310) mostly attributes this phenomenon to the lack of a strong civil society in the Middle East. In other words, he says, “the Middle East is dependent on a strong civil society as a precondition to democratization” (Boose 310). To illustrate his point, he gave the example of how Middle Eastern countries – Libya and Tunisia have failed to achieve significant democratic gains. He argues that a smooth transition into a democracy failed to happen in Libya because there was a nonexistent civil society before the revolution happened (Boose 310). Similarly, he argues that Tunisia had a relatively successful revolution because of the existence of a civil society before the revolution happened in 2011 (Boose 310).

Kim (8) wades into the debate surrounding the role of the civil society in the Arab world by paying more focusing on the presence of the civil society in the Middle East. Contrary to the views of researchers who have said that the civil society is unable to thrive in the Middle East, or has been virtually non-existent in the region, Eltaweel (3) argues that some Middle Eastern countries, such as Egypt, have a for a long time tolerated a civil society in their country. He also argues that the civil society’s role in these countries is to push the government to adopt a democratic form of governance (Eltaweel 3). Sticking to the same narrative, the author clarifies that prior to the Arab Spring; the Islamic movement catapulted itself to an influential position in the Egyptian political space, thereby playing the role of the most recognizable civil society group (Eltaweel 3).

Why is the Civil Society Weak in the Arab World?

This paper has already shown that the civil society has a great role in shaping the political and social structures of different countries. Evidence has been shown on how countries in the East and West have different conceptions of the same. One important argument that needs to be explored further, despite the rhetoric of whether such a society would work in the Arab world, or how researchers have failed to have a proper grasp of it in the Middle East, is why civil society groups have failed to thrive in the Middle East. One argument that has been touted by some researchers is the unique cultural and religious dynamics of the Arab world that have made it impossible for civil society groups to achieve their goals, at least by the standards of those practiced in the west. This argument brings our attention to the unique political events and cultural dynamics in many Middle Eastern countries that have made it virtually impossible for civil society groups to thrive in the Middle East. For example, dwindling Democracy after the Arab Spring has made it difficult for significant civil rights programs to thrive.

The Arab Spring was viewed as a major milestone in the political and social development of many Middle Eastern countries. However, Gershman (par. 1) says there has been a backlash of authoritarianism that has hit the region after this event. Relative to this assertion, he says,

The setbacks in the Middle East have actually been part of a global phenomenon of authoritarian resurgence that has been marked by increased repression in Russia and China, as well as by setbacks to democracy in smaller countries like Venezuela, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Thailand. (Gershman par. 1)

Regardless of the resurgence of authoritarian rule in different parts of the world, the phenomenon has been more vivid in the Middle East. Indeed, the El Nadeem Center in Cairo says more than 400 people have “disappeared” from Egypt after the military coup (Gershman par. 3). This is in sharp contrast to only 10 people who were recorded as having disappeared in 2010. The same organization has reported 464 deaths of people who were incarcerated during the military coup (Gershman par. 3). They have also reported more than 700 cases of torture during the same period. Reports also indicate that more than 41,000 were arrested in the first few months after the military coup in 2013 (Gershman par. 3). Most of the captives were not accorded a fair trial and were restrained in overcrowded prisons across the country. One prominent captive was Georgetown scholar, Emad Shahin (Gershman par. 3).

If we look at the actions of the civil society in North Africa, we find that the Egyptian government has initiated a crackdown intended to muzzle the voice of civil society groups (Eltaweel 3 – 4). For example, a prominent Egyptian Lawyer, Gamal Eid was imprisoned for educating citizens about their civil society and human rights (Gershman par. 3). Professionals from the Cairo Institute of Human Rights Studies and the Egyptian Center for Rights to Education have also suffered the same fate (Eltaweel 3 – 4).

The objective of the government has been to muzzle the voices of non-state actors and empower state-controlled apparatus to chart the way forward for the country. Bauer (1) contends that the action of Middle Eastern governments in squashing dissenting voices is a dangerous strategy because they eliminate the only voice that could mediate between the all-powerful governments and the vulnerable citizens. Indeed, as Bauer (71-72) observes, the civil society could help to relieve tensions between governments and the citizens, thereby preventing possibilities that dissenting voices would lead to blown-out confrontations between the citizens and their governments, or revolutions as were witnessed in 2011 and beyond. Gershman supports this finding by saying,

That is a proven recipe for social explosion, not for working out and solving fundamental problems. As the Norwegian Nobel Committee recognized in giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Tunisia’s National Dialogue Quartet, Tunisia could not have resolved the deep ideological cleavages between secular and Islamist political forces without civil society intervening to broker a solution—groups representing human rights advocates, trade unions, lawyers, and business. (par. 5)

Generally, what we find out from this statement is that civil societies play an important role in mediating between the state and the citizens. Since they can help provide non-violent solutions to perennial political conflicts, eliminating or suppressing their activities is a zero-sum game. Again, Bauer (82) reiterates the importance of democracy in making civil society work in the Middle East. He affirms the views of Romaniuk and Marlin (118) who believe that civil society is insufficient in the absence of reforms in the Middle East. Allowing adequate space for civil society groups to undertake their activities is much more important than just embracing a democratically elected governance system. This fact was evident in the Kasserien Protests that happened in western Tunisia, three years after the revolution (Gershman par. 5). The lesson we learn from this finding is that it is not enough to merely oust a dictator and replace him with a democratically elected government; authorities have to provide enough space for non-state actors to thrive as well.

The Role of Islam in contributing to the failure of the Civil Society Movement in the Middle East

Researchers have proposed different theories to explain why the Middle East was immune to the sweeping changes of democratic reform that affected different parts of the world including South America, Africa, and Eastern Europe. Huntington (164) famously coined a term for this revolution as the third wave. It happened in the 1980s and 1990s. The focus on this phenomenon has stood out as a popular topic in the fields of comparative politics and democratic transitions. The main point of reference was the fall of the Soviet Union and the demonization or authoritarianism, which is synonymous with authoritarian rule in many Arab nations and some Asian countries (Salam 6). Different facets of the academic world have often expressed their contention with the fact that democracy cannot work in the Middle East. Their arguments have mostly been supported by cultural and economic factors that are unique to the Middle East.

One mistake made by many researchers who have examined the role of civil society groups in the Middle East is the assumption that all Arab countries are the same. Indeed, if we examine the role of and place of civil society groups in these nations, it is pertinent to appreciate the differences in governments and liberty across different nations in the region. For example, civil society groups in Egypt, which are more than 16,000 (according to national statistics undertaken before the 2011 revolution), are bound to have undue influence on the country’s political system compared to a country like Saudi Arabia, which has a virtually non-existent civil society and which prohibits different types of social mobilizations (Eltaweel 3 – 4). Nonetheless, the striking theme to investigate in this analysis is the role of Islam in influencing the activities of civil societies in Arab countries. Indeed, while most of the Arab countries highlighted in this paper may have slightly varied political, social, economic or social systems, they are bound by religion as a core theme.

In this analysis, Kamali (457) suggests the importance of not only recognizing Islam as a religion, but as a political theory that has permeated different levels of governance in many Middle Eastern countries. In other words, Islam is the major source of political power that different governments in the Middle East get their legitimacy from. Relative to this assertion, Kamali says, “Islamic beliefs and traditions have been a major source of legitimization of political power and the position of the state in Muslim countries during a long history” (457). The decisive role of religion in the Muslim world can be demonstrated from the influence that religious leaders wield in the political systems of their countries (Noi 1). Particularly, it can be evidenced from the power of the Ulama, which is a group of educated religious leaders in the Middle East (Banuazizi par. 5).

Iran has this type of sociopolitical system whereby the government runs the daily affairs of the state, but the Supreme Leader also has an undue influence on the political system of the state (Banuazizi para 5; Bruno par. 1-2). This influence is enshrined in the fact that the politics of Iran works within a framework of theocracy where Islamic ideology permeates through different cadres of the country’s governance system. Indeed, if we take a closer analysis of this view, we find that it is difficult to separate Shia Islam from the country’s political structure. In the same breadth of analysis, it is impractical to assume that since political leaders have to seek their legitimacy from Islamic traditions, norms and practices, it would be possible for the civil society to assume legitimacy without acknowledging their place in the country’s religious structure.

Delving into this argument is Noi (1) who argues that the concept of civil society is a western-styled ideology that largely clashes with Islamic polity on how people should live, or how states should interact with their subjects. While it is important to appreciate the role played by Islam in influencing the political ideology of Iran, it is also important to recognize the views of different researchers who have pointed out that Islam has run its full course in the country (Akbarzadeh 58). This does not mean that the Islamic foundation of the religion is no longer important to the citizens of Iran, but the perennial use of religion to supersede most aspects of the country’s political and governance structures has outlived its usefulness. This is why some Iranians are finding it more difficult to accept the notion of an Islamic state (Banuazizi par. 5; Bruno par. 1-2). Supporting this assertion is Banuazizi who says,

With the erosion of such religious legitimacy, the clerics’ monopoly on power is certain to be challenged from within, unless serious political reforms are undertaken to broaden political participation and to limit the stifling role of the state in the many spheres of public and private life. (par. 2)

The above statement brings us back to understanding the important relationship between social freedoms and civil society. However, what we gather from these views is the role played by Islam as a political theory in the Middle East.

Conclusion

In this paper, we have seen the influence of civil society groups in the political and governance systems of the Middle East. Most of our discussions have focused on highlighting how civil society groups work in western countries and Arab countries. This focus has stretched to investigating the roles of the civil society in Middle East countries and in western countries. A noteworthy point we have discovered in our analysis is the undeniable link between civil society and democracy. Here, we have seen that both factors are dependent on one another in the sense that it is difficult for civil society groups to function well in the absence of democracy. It is equally difficult for democracy to thrive in the absence of a vibrant civil society.

This relationship explains why many western countries have been able to make significant civil right progresses in the past century. Nonetheless, we cannot translate the same success of civil rights groups to Arab countries because the social, political, and cultural dynamics of Arab countries significantly differ with those in the west. For example, the absence of strong democratic principles in Arab nations makes it difficult for civil society groups to thrive in this region. However, this statement stands true only if we assume the conventional understanding of civil society as is defined in western societies. This is the main point of discussion in this paper because we find that there are different conceptualizations of civil society in both western and Arabic circles.

For example, in western circles of education, civil society actions or groups are often measured based on their roles as instruments of democratic safeguards or transitions. In the Middle East, civil society groups have always been conceptualized in the context of promoting pro-Arabic principles. The Muslim Brotherhood has used this framework to champion political and social reforms in the Middle East. However, if we use the western yardstick of evaluating civil rights progress, we find that researchers often ignore the actions of Islam-based civil rights groups in the Arab peninsular. Instead, they use the yardstick of measuring civil society progress based on how much democratic gains have been made from their actions.

Therefore, the understanding of what civil society entails is the main point of departure between what western-styled researchers consider as civil society success and what researchers who understand the Middle East context view civil society success. If we use the latter approach, we find that civil society groups have always existed in the Middle East and although they may have not achieved significant democratic gains, it would be unfair to assume that Arab nations have never had such groups.

We used the constructivist theory to come up with these findings because we have constructed our arguments from the contextual differences between Arab nations and western circles of academia. The role of religion in Arab politics played a key role in our discussions because it is a political theory in itself. The failure to understand the cultural and religious dynamics of the Middle East may obscure the understanding of the real actions of civil society in the Middle East. Unlike western countries, religion and culture play a superior role to political ideologies in the Middle East and define what is acceptable or unacceptable in the context of civil society actions. Therefore, it is difficult to portray an accurate picture of civil society actions in the Middle East without first understanding the place of Islam in the first place.

The use of the constructivist perspective in this research paper offered the advantage of reflexivity, in the sense that it helped us to open up questions of agency in relation to the role of the civil society in the Middle East. This is in sharp contrast to the use of neorealist and neoliberal views on the same research issue. The use of the constructivist theory brings to our attention the possible ethical tensions that could arise from the influence of government officials, or state-sponsored agencies that may have an unfavorable view with people who are consumers of these research findings. In future, it is important to investigate how constructivists could navigate these issues to gain the full confidence of their audience and not increase the tensions that exist with state actors.

Works Cited

Akbarzadeh, Shahram. American Democracy Promotion in the Changing Middle East: From Bush to Obama. Routledge, 2013.

Alagappa, Muthiah. Civil Society and Political Change in Asia: Expanding and Contracting Democratic Space. Stanford University Press, 2004.

Banuazizi, Ali. “Islamic State and Civil Society in Iran.” African Portal, 2001, Web.

Bauer, Patricia. Arab Spring Challenges for Democracy and Security in the Mediterranean. Routledge, 2016.

Boose, Jason. “Democratization and Civil Society: Libya, Tunisia and the Arab Spring.” International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, vol. 2, no. 4, 2012, pp. 310-315.

Browers, Michaelle. Democracy and Civil Society in Arab Political Thought: Transcultural Possibilities. Syracuse University Press, 2006.

Bruno, Greg. “Religion and Politics in Iran.” Council on Foreign Relations, 2008, Web.

Chandra, Kanchan. Constructivist Theories of Ethnic Politics. OUP USA, 2012.

Drysdale, Peter. Reform and Recovery in East Asia. Routledge, 2003.

Elbayar, Kareem. “NGO Laws in Selected Arab States.” The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, vol. 7, no. 4, 2005, pp.1-24.

Eltaweel, Hend. Civil Society in the Arab World: Case Study of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Middle East Studies Center, 2012.

Forst, Rainer. The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. Columbia University Press, 2012.

Gershman, Carl. “Islam and Democracy after the Arab Spring.” World Affairs Journal, 2016, Web.

Hamzawy, Amr. Civil Society in the Middle East. Verlag Hans Schiler, 2003.

Hawthorne, Amy. Middle East Democracy: Is Civil Society the Answer? Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2004.

Huntington, Samuel. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late 20th Century. University of Oklahoma Press, 2012.

Kamali, Masoud. “Civil Society and Islam: A sociological Perspective.” European Journal of Sociology, vol. 42, no. 3, 2001, pp. 457-482.

Kim, Sunhyuk. The Politics of Democratization in Korea: The Role of Civil Society. University of Pittsburgh Pre, 2000.

Liebert, Ulrike, and Hans-Jörg Trenz. The New Politics of European Civil Society. Routledge, 2012.

Noi, Aylin. Islam and Democracy: Perspectives on the Arab Spring. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014.

Romaniuk, Scott, and Marguerite Marlin. Democracy and Civil Society in a Global Era. Routledge, 2016.

Salam, Nawaf. Civil Society in the Arab World: The Historical and Political Dimension. Islamic Legal Studies Program, 2002.

Soares, Philip. Civil Society in Modern Democracies: Definition, Impact on Democracy And Critical Assessment. GRIN Verlag, 2009.

United Nations. Role of Civil Society in Promoting a Just and Lasting Peace in the Middle East: An Israeli-Palestinian Dialogue. United Nations Publications, 2005.

Wiarda, Howard. Civil Society: The American Model and Third World Development. Westview Press, 2003.

Click Here To Order Now!