BACK tO HOME PAGE

Our studies in Arabic

Anti-Violence Culture: A Look at Post-War Iraq By Shakir al-Anbari What can Iraq’s intellectuals do by way of contributing to the reconstruction of their war-torn country? What can be said about culture in post-war Iraq? What kind of culture is emerging after the fall of one-party rule and the end of censorship? What are the conditions in which Iraqi intellectuals pursue their creative activity today? These are some of the questions the author attempts to answer. A different culture is taking shape in relative freedom, including scores of newspapers, periodicals, websites and private satellite TV channels that have mushroomed since the US-led invasion in 2003. The book describes the Iraqi cultural scene in the shadow of ongoing violence and sectarian tensions where staging a play or making a movie is a death-defying adventure. The author is an Iraqi novelist born in 1957. He has first-hand experience of the period covered in his the book. He has many contributions that are critical of prevalent violence. The Dynamics of Conflict in Iraq By a team of scholars Commissioned by the Iraq Institute for Strategic Studies, a group of scholars study the underlying forces that drive the ongoing conflict in Iraq, their co-relationship and what sets them off to cause rampant violence in Iraqi society. The study offers in-depth analysis of what it views as a highly complex and Iraq-specific conflict. The major players seeking stability are themselves involved in the conflict. The conflict dynamics predates occupation and has intertwined with new dynamics triggered by occupation. The insurgents use extreme violence to destabilize the country and undermine efforts to shore up Iraqi sovereignty via constitutional structures. The book draws on field research carried out in Iraq between 2002 and 2004 as well as official and non-official data collected in London, Washington, Jordan, Kuwait and Iraq (Basra, Baghdad, Kirkuk and Falluja). The book’s methodical approach highlights the structural dimensions of the conflict and the main actors analyzing their positions, ambitions and motives in transitional Iraq. Constitutional Quandary By a group of Iraqi writers This books looks at the new Iraqi constitution and how it was drafted as a unique experience in the Arab region. The constitutional has been perceived as a historical opportunity to restructure the modern Iraqi state accommodating the concerns and interests of the various ethnic groups and communities. Diverse as the views it offers the book highlights the contributors’ shared proposition that Iraq’s new constitution can do with certain amendments. The proposed amendments focus on vital issues addressed in the constitution like individual freedoms, the personal status law, the relationship between religion and state, the state apparatus, economic management and revenue distribution. Women in Iraq’s New Constitution By Rashid Khayoon and Badoor Zeki Mahmood The pamphlet offers a brief historical account of women’s status in the constitutions drafted for Iraq in different periods. The authors consider the consequences of the new constitution’s provisions overriding the relatively progressive personal status law No 188 of 1959. That law reconciles Islamic tenets with the spirit of the age, especially the gains made by women in their campaign for equal rights. The authors hold that women will be the victims of any failure to enforce a civil law on personal status as the Islamic law, sharia, is mostly prejudiced in favour of men. They warn that undermining the gains made under the 1959 law on personal status by introducing Islamic courts will be a dangerously divisive move threatening the very cohesion of the Iraqi family. Democracy: A Socio-Historical Approach By Faleh Abdul-Jabbar The existing democratic system based on social contract, consensus, inclusive representation and separation of the three branches of government has not emerged overnight, says the author. It has evolved through civil strife, popular revolutions and regional as well as world wars. Political and social theories may broadly agree that this form of government has been associated with the inception of the industrial age. This however does not imply that any transformation towards a modern industrialized society will immediately result in democracy under any circumstance. The essay addresses the historical manifestations of this prolonged, uneven and sometimes horrific process. Recalling the historical landmarks in the process of building democracy the author scrutinizes the relevant concepts, outlines the different paths taken since then and reveals the different manner in which various nations have had to tackle the problem now that democracy has become the norm worldwide. The despot By Zuhair al-Jazaeri The book explores the historical background and specific conditions that had been conducive to the establishment and cementation of Baath totalitarianism in Iraq. It also discusses the marriage of one-party rule with a clan system. In a sense the book is a biography of the Baath regime and its leader Saddam Hussein. To those young Iraqis who have not lived through the early years of Baath power and the heydays of Saddam’s Iraq after the oil boom, the book offers food for thought. The book describes the plight of a generation of Iraqis who had endured brutal persecution at the hands of a regime awash with petrodollars. Constitutional and Despotism By Rshid Khayoon The 100^th anniversary was marked in 2006 of the movement that in 1906 challenged rulers in Iran, Turkey and Iraq by campaigning for constitutional government in the three countries. Iraq’s holy city of Najaf was the scene of heated controversy between supporters of despotism and advocates of a government constrained by constitutional rules. Shiite clerics were divided into a faction favouring constitutional rule against political and religious despotism and another upholding the status quo fearing such a radical change would undermine their authority. Events unfolding in Iraq and the region today show that 100 years on a largely similar dispute is being played out between a camp holding on to the prevalent dictatorial forms of government and a fledgling movement for democratic reform. Civil Society in Post-war Iraq By Faleh Abdul-Jabbar Iraqi civil society has been set free after about half a century of dictatorship. Its free development and evolution will depend on a strengthening of market economy, democratic liberties and the rule of law rather than of militias. Once they are in control of the country’s resources oil-rich governments are inclined to promote tyranny, do away with civil society or manipulate it. Civil society cannot prosper and fulfill its role without a sound institutional structure, especially an independent judiciary. Pointing out that plurality is a precondition for Iraq to have a mature civil society, the author notes that this plurality has assumed a sectarian-ethnic character in post-war Iraq. Such plurality may preserve communal diversity but excludes intra-communal and intra-ethnic diversity. Indeed, plurality along sectarian lines puts at risk those who do not conform with this kind of societal differentiation. Islam and Secular Humanism By Sadiq Jalal al-Adhum The author puts the apparently simple question:  Can general notions like human rights, religious tolerance, etc be forged proceeding from a particular tradition? Sadiq Jalal al-Adhum, the author, answers with a decisive “yes” – by relying on history.  Such concepts as democracy, civil liberties, human rights and freedom of speech have been identified with Europe’s enlightenment.  But these very ideas have acquired a totally universal meaning.  Always drawing on history Islam itself that developed in two desert towns had assumed an overwhelming universal character.  The author notes the secular humanitarian paradigm has a dual status today.  But it remains a normative yardstick as regards human rights issues.  Consensual Democracy By Arend Lijphart Introduction Established notions and ideas need to be under sustained scrutiny if knowledge is to maintain its steady advance and growth.  Common notions like nation building, nationalism, development, civil society, globalization, democratization and market economy no doubt form the modern world’s fabric. Globalization, for instance, defines the shape of the new world with the nation-state as the building block of this edifice.  Growth and market economy relate to the need for the world building unit, the nation-state, to be based on an economy that meets people’s needs on the one hand and has a social responsibility to minimize –or, if possible, eliminate – all distinctions between groups and classes.  Civil society and democracy are two other notions that relate to a societal structure that is independent of the state or any specific system to run this state.    There is now unprecedented interest in the notion and experience of “consensual democracy”. Fortunately the relevant theory was developed after consensus experience had grown out of the need to expand the conventional version of majoritarian democracy. Hence, the consensus theory evolves on specific experience rather than speculative thinking.    The first attempts at consensus were made in west European countries like Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria and Canada.  Far from being based on a theorem these attempts were prompted by practical needs in riven, ethnically heterogeneous societies.  In other words, none of them was a monolithic, uniform nation on the premise that nations are defined in terms of homogenous culture (language, faith, race, history, etc).    Like theories on nationalism the consensus theory followed experience rather than preceding it.  Our problem as well as that of other people is that we have no experience to juxtapose with a construct called consensus theory.  The theory had been fleshed out by such renowned political scientists as Arend Lijphart and Gerhard Lambruch while more than a dozen others have contributed by in-depth examination.    What is the difference between democracy and consensus democracy, and why prefixing the original notion with this adjective?  Democracy is based on the principles defined by John Locke and Montesquieu.  These principles imply rule by consent of the governed –through elections-, majority rule –whoever wins more votes- and separation of powers.  These principles are supplemented by human rights, civil rights, women rights, international law, etc.   The Locke-Montesquieu theory is known as “majority rule”.    This classical theory had evolved through the experience of early democracies in England, France and America in the 18^th and 19^th centuries.  Majoritarian democracy emerged and established itself in nationally homogeneous countries without religious, ethnic or cultural minorities.  But this national uniformity was not the norm rule in every country.   Moreover, social mobility driven by globalization has been eroding national-cultural homogeneity in the model countries themselves.  There are hardly 15 states that can claim to be nationally homogeneous.    How is this relevant to democracy?  Juan Linz says the majority and minority political principle would turn into national majority and minority ending up as “majority tyranny”.   Aaron Yevtchital, an Israeli scholar, believes there is no democracy in Israel but tyranny of the bigger ethnic group.    Political practicians have tried to resolve the problem in two ways. The first is by federalism or autonomous regions to ensure the rights of minority ethnic groups.   This way is inspired by American and German federal experience to curtail central authority by power division along geographic lines between metropol and peripheries in addition to the standard separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judiciary.    The other way is the consensual experience that virtually came after World War Two as recognition of the inadequacy of the customary majoritarian democracy.  Thus consensus democracy had stemmed from an established rather than an emergent democratic basis.    According to Lijphart, consensus democracy has four distinct characteristics:  1- A broad-based coalition, involving the majority party as well as others, 2- Proportional representation (in the cabinet, administration, state institutions and essentially in elections), 3- A mutual veto right exercised by both the majority and the minority to preempt monopoly of decision making, 4- Self-administration by each group of its own affairs.  These in short are the distinguishing features of consensus democracy in relation to majoritarian democracy.    The debate on consensus democracy in the Arab world and Levant was initiated in the late 1980s by Anton Masra of Lebanon. Commentators have proclaimed Mr. Masra as perhaps consensus democracy’s staunchest advocate.  However, no seminars or conferences are known to have been held on this theory.   It might be argued that democracy has to be built first before embarking on its consensual version, if there is such a thing.    Elements of consensus could be discerned in our past.  Under the “millet system” the Ottoman Empire had ensured or sought to ensure autonomy of various religious groups and sects in a hierarchal society where Muslims ranked the apex level.   The rise of Arab or Kurdish nationalism was simply a manifestation of the shift from the “millet system” to the abstract citizen domain as a way of overcoming religious division.    The European consensus theory lays no claim to anything beyond a generalization of condensed experiences with emphasis on the difference between each one.  It offers a procedural package of measures to protect minorities and allay ethnic as well as other divisions.  These measures are designed to make up for some of majoritarian democracy’s limitations just as the social safety net is meant to mitigate sharp social divisions that pose a potential threat to the politico-social system.    True, democracy is based on consent but it does not create it.  Consent is achieved through expanded economic, political, cultural and administrative participation and inclusiveness.  This is precisely what we lack – participation.  The only consensual characteristics we have are ethnically and culturally divided societies without any means to contain the more serious excesses of this division.  In other words, we have a consensus problem without a mechanism to check it, not to mention resolving the issue.    Consensus has gained wide currency since the 2003 war.  In Lebanon it has its relevance at an elitist level.  Apart from that it seems that most Arabs don’t even know the origin of the word.  Some have decided it is an American conspiracy, which is ridiculous considering the consensus theory is of a European origin pure and simple.  It is in a nutshell a departure from the standard form of government represented by the British, French and American majoritarian system.   The Paradox of Plenty By Terry Lynn Karl This book explains a puzzle:  In the midst of two massive oil booms in the 1970s, why did oil-exporting governments as different as Venezuela, Iran, Nigeria, Algeria and Indonesia choose common development paths and suffer similarly disappointing outcomes? In this brilliant book Karl illuminates the manifold economic and political factors that determine the nature of the state in oil-exporting countries and explain why booms destabilize regimes while creating the illusion of prosperity.    Karl contends that the rentier or what she calls “petro-states” have strikingly similar institutional arrangements and patterns of public policy despite their apparent differences in regime types, cultures and geostrategic locations.  Dependence on petroleum leads them to extreme centralization of political power and to incoherent public bureaucracies.  The result is uncontrolled public spending at the expense of statecraft. Meticulously documented and theoretically innovative, Paradox of Plenty is essential reading for every political economist and policy maker.

The Dynamics of Conflict in Iraq By a team of scholars Iraqi Kurdistan: Historical Origins of Federalism By Saad Iskander Anti-Violence Culture: A Look at Post-War Iraq By Shakir al-Anbari Hezbollah and Martyrdom By Joseph al-Agha Constitutional Quandary By a group of Iraqi writers Women in Iraq’s New Constitution By Rashid Khayoon and Badoor Zeki Mahmood Islam and Secular Humanism By Sadiq Jalal al-Adhum Consensual Democracy By Arend Lijphart The Paradox of Plenty By Terry Lynn Karl