Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
These arguments, along with the one that per capita military spending results in more resilient
regimes, are all difficult to prove, especially given the unusually low sample size of fourteen
Arab states and four successful uprisings. These arguments ignore the difficult-to-measure
factors of information and communication technologies (ICTs) influence on building civil
society despite a lack of taxation and face-to-face social organization, as well as the evaluations
made by military elites on the ground when decided whether to defect or not a decision that
could be influenced by the perception of protesters as representing the true voice of the people,
or the overwhelming nature of the protests.
The authors claims regarding dynasticism are more causally sound given the empirical
evidence, it seems logical that hereditary regimes, with their clear delineation of leadership, have
a more stable hold on the coercive apparatus and control of the state, as shown by Herb and other
scholars. Still, in excluding Irans system of diffusion of power and resistance to popular
uprising from their analysis, the authors miss the point that dynasticism, as well as institutional
diffusion of power, both lend themselves to flexibility and adaptability, which are the more
important causal mechanisms in the resilience of authoritarian regimes.
Lastly, the authors make some generalizations that are problematic in getting to the root
of potential application of their theory. Despite the low number of cases, their dismissal of Libya
as a possible case of regime change for the counterfactual of no international intervention seems
pessimistic, especially given the persistent instability of the Assad regime in Syria under similar
circumstances. Also, the treatment of protest movements as static is problematic; they do not
investigate the actual difference in terms of demographic, geographic, and organizational make-
up of protest movements, which according to several scholars (especially those of ICT use in
protest movements) believe might be the key to understanding why not all protest movements are
created equal in their ability to affect change.
Overall, Brownlee, Masoud, and Reynolds present several key factors for understanding
causality of regime change during the Arab Spring. Their dismissal and generalization of other
factors, though, leaves this article missing some crucial details as well as some underlying
themes that might provide a more comprehensive view of the movement.
Works Cited
Bellin, Eva. Reconsidering the Robustness of Authoritarianism in the Middle East: lessons from
the Arab Spring. Comparative Politics 44.2 (2012): 127-149.
Brownlee, Jason, Tarek Masoud, and Andrew Reynolds. Why The Modest Harvest? Journal of
Democracy 24.4 (2013): 29-44.
Herbe, Michael. Monarachism Matters. Foreign Policy (November 26, 2012).