The concept of ‘state’ is widely discussed by scholars from various points of view which can differ greatly. These different approaches to the analysis of this notion depend on the peculiarities of the historical, social, and economical development of definite countries. Thus, the peculiar features of the realization of the ‘state’ concept in the Middle East and North Africa are predominantly based on the factors which are characteristic for the historical progress of the region. To understand the processes which are typical for the growth of modern states in the Middle East and North Africa and which are characterized by interventionism in politics, economy and the low level of legitimacy, it is necessary to pay attention to the aspects of the development of the states in the context of historical events and international relations with the countries in the region.
What are the main aspects which influence the formation of such types of Eastern states which act in the regional and world arena today? The first point which requires its further investigation is the issue of the role of the society in these states. There are a lot of factors which affect the development of the state in the Eastern part of the world more significantly than the norms of the state’s development, regulations of the structure presented in the form of laws. It is typical for these countries to base the laws on the religious aspects. Moreover, as the result of such a tradition other definite factors increase their role. Thus, the role of “tribalism, sectarianism, regionalism, primordial sentiments, and ascriptive identities in Middle Eastern politics contributed to the view that the state is little more than an arena of socially engendered conflict or an instrument of family, sect, or class domination” (Anderson 1). It is impossible to ignore this fact while discussing the peculiarities of the economical development of the region because all the current relations in it are based on definite historical events and are often justified by the religious norms and rules. This situation can be considered as having certain negative effects for the states’ development.
The most important contradiction of the economical and legal progress between Western and Eastern states is in the fact that when the Western world’s economy develops on the principles of openness and globalization, the Eastern states continue to realize the principles of political and economical interventionism and hegemony in the region (Ayubi). Thus, the problem of boundaries in the Eastern region contradicts the globalization processes in the world. During long periods of time Eastern states led the wars for the expansion of boundaries and realized the interventionist’s intentions (Ayubi). “The frequency of border conflicts may be an indication of the novelty of the state’s territorial integrity, while the ambiguities of loyalty and legitimacy characteristic of the Middle Eastern politics may indicate the fragility of the present-day states” (Anderson 2).
The result of such a situation is the existence of the countries in the region where the principles of state are not formed (Anderson). That is why it is difficult to speak about the realization of the regular norms and the control in these countries. Moreover, the destructive aspects in the development of the question of political and economic formation of the states can be observed in these countries because of the radical regime’s activities which often act according to the principles of the ‘shadow economy’(Ayubi).
Thus, it is possible to speak that the situation with the weak legitimacy in the region can be analyzed as the effect of the peculiarities of the historical development of the countries with the focus on the society as the basics for the state. “The formulae for legitimacy are less a reflection of the contemporary political economy of state-society relations than of historical, cultural, or religious conceptions of the obligations of governors and leaders” (Anderson 15). Moreover, the negative effects have such processes which are rather characteristic for Middle East and North Africa as the lack of democracy, press and speech freedom which end in the lack of governance because the idea of the legal state is based on the democratic principles and rules (Harrigan and Tilley). That is why definite Eastern states fail in their implementation of the political rights and civil liberties. These principles which are necessary for the effective activities in the world political and economic arena contradict the historically conditioned norms. The impossibility to transform the principles of the organization of the states and their economies radically can lead to the failure of participation in the world economic processes which depend on the aspects of the liberalization (Harrigan and Tilley).
The states in the Middle East and North Africa have the interventionist’s character which is the effect of the development of long conflicts between the nations for their territories. Thus, the notion of boundaries has the decisive meaning for understanding the peculiarities of the states’ progress. Certain countries and nations have not solved the problem of their boundaries yet. Moreover, their economies can be considered as ‘shadow’ ones. They can also be based on the traditional and historical vision of the state and reject the principles of globalization. All these factors influenced the realization of the concept of ‘state’ in the Eastern region.
Works Cited
Anderson, Lisa. “The State in the Middle East and North Africa”. Comparative Politics 20.1 (1987): 1-18. Print.
Ayubi, Nazih N. Overstating the Arab State: Politics and Society in the Middle East. NY: IB Tauris, 1995. Print.
Harrigan, Jane and Helen Tilley. “Economic and Political Dimensions of Globalisation in the Arab World”. Globalisation, Democratisation and Radicalisation in the Arab World. Ed. Jane Harrigan and Hamed El-Said. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 15-47. Print.