Yemen Observer: http://www.yobserver.com
Posted in:
Opinions
Written By: MARK N, KATZP
Article Date: Dec 2, 2007 - 12:57:46 AM
There has long been in the West a highly romantic view of the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula. This view has been fostered by numerous 19th and 20th century books authored primarily by well-connected British political agents, soldiers, and travelers, as well as by David Lean's 1962 Academy Award-winning movie, "Lawrence of Arabia."
Many of these individuals deplored the arrival of modernity in the West and idealized the pre-modern lifestyle of the tribesman (who was portrayed as a natural-born warrior) and the tribal sheik (who was portrayed not just as a warrior, but also as an inspiring leader and wily negotiator). Contributing to this romance was the fact that these books (including T. E. Lawrence's) were written about a time when Arabian Peninsula governments were relatively weak and poor and when tribal sheiks enjoyed a great deal of autonomy. Finally, there was a geopolitical aspect to this romance: if an outside power could somehow rally the tribes (as T.E. Lawrence did), great benefit would accrue both to the country and to its agents who accomplished this (if not to the tribes themselves).
There are still countries - Iraq and Afghanistan most notably - where central governments are weak and armed tribes can operate autonomously. On the Arabian Peninsula, though, modernization in the form of central governments strengthened by oil revenues arrived long ago. These central governments have used their oil wealth to arm themselves to a far greater extent than the tribes ever were, thus making rebellion against the former too costly to be worth undertaking. They have also provided economic resources both to tribal sheiks (in order to tie their interests to those of the central government's) and to individual tribesmen (thus reducing their dependence on - and loyalty toward - their tribal sheiks). This process is most advanced in the peninsula's four "city states" (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates), highly advanced in Saudi Arabia and Oman, and least advanced in Yemen. But even in Yemen the central government has become much stronger and richer compared to the tribes than it was in the past.
It is not, however, just rich, powerful central governments that have brought about "the taming of the tribes." Modernization itself has done so, perhaps even more thoroughly. While writers and filmmakers have lamented the passing of the harsh, rugged lifestyle of pre-modern tribesmen, the tribesmen themselves have gladly abandoned it in exchange for living in modern homes, working in salaried jobs, sending their children to school, and shopping for consumer goods like people elsewhere. Most modern tribesmen will not give up or even risk these comforts and benefits to answer a call to revolt that is unlikely to succeed.
Indeed, modern tribesmen want to be modern. The children of the sheikly families (as well as those of ordinary tribesmen) seek modern education - often in the West. They seek to make careers not simply within the tribal system, but in the modern professions. They do not see themselves as bound to live among their fellow tribesmen, but reside wherever they can make money - whether in their own country, elsewhere in the Middle East, or even the West. Modern tribesmen, then, pursue their own individual and family interests.
However, the fact that Arabian Peninsula governments are now much stronger and richer compared to tribes than they were in the past does not mean that tribes are no longer important to those who belong to them. Tribes provide their members with a set of contacts that their members can trust more easily than non-members; just as with members of churches or associations in the West, the social cost of not honoring a commitment to a fellow member can be high.
Tribal connections can also help members obtain jobs and educational opportunities. They still play an important role in identifying and bringing together what are considered to be appropriate marriage partners. Like legislators in the United States, tribal sheiks provide "constituent contact" services such as helping ordinary tribesmen in dealing with government bureaucracy. As populations have increased, bureaucracies have become more complex, and the need for government services has grown, some tribesmen report that the role of sheiks in helping tribesmen deal with government has become more important in recent years than before.
The increased number of educated tribesmen with experience in the West has also led to change. Many tribes increasingly resemble Western-style associations, with meetings for the leadership and professional ranks taking place in hotel ballrooms and similar venues. Instead of largely uneducated tribesmen depending on the judgment of fatherly (but often not much better educated) sheiks as in the past, sheiks must increasingly develop the skills needed to work with, motivate, and retain the loyalty of educated tribesmen - much like the leadership of voluntary associations and other organizations in the West.
Different tribes, of course, have different relationships with the governments of the countries they reside in. Arabian Peninsula governments tend to recruit security service personnel from the tribes that they regard as the most loyal. These tribes benefit greatly from this, and thus have a strong interest in the survival of the regime. In Yemen, President Saleh relies especially strongly on his own tribe –- the Sanhani branch of the Hashid tribal confederation. In Oman, the Ibadi tribes appear to be the most enthusiastic about Sultan Qaboos (who, like previous Omani sultans, is also an Ibadi) and about the sultanate itself - in part because it appears that there are fewer Ibadis in Oman than Sunnis).
In Saudi Arabia, the tribes of Najd are the strongest supporters of the Saudi royal family.
Being a member of any of these tribes can have important economic benefits. Being a member of less favored tribes in any of these countries, though, is also economically beneficial. With decent jobs difficult to obtain, being well-connected within even a less favored tribe may be important for its members' employment prospects. And since governments usually do not want bad relations with even less favored tribes, being able to appeal to a tribal sheik may (as mentioned earlier) be important in helping tribesmen obtain government services or mediate any dispute with the government.
In general, being a sheik or an ordinary member of a less favored tribe has far more economic than political salience. It could, though, have political salience if ever there were an uncertain or contested political transition. There is little, though, that these tribes can do to create contested successions: the emergence of these depends on the inability of the present ruling families (plus the top security force elite in Yemen) to agree upon who should inherit power. But if successions occur quickly and peacefully - as ruling families have a strong interest in their doing - opportunities for tribes to play a more politically influential role may simply not arise at all.
Another way that tribes could become politically more influential would be through progress toward democratization in the Arabian Peninsula countries. Tribal sheiks might well play an important role in influencing how tribesmen vote. They could also prove to be conservative, pragmatic politicians who provide an attractive alternative to extremists. Indeed, this has happened in Kuwait where an elected national assembly plays an important political role. Whether this would happen elsewhere in the Arabian Peninsula, though, is unlikely to be tested any time soon as none of the other governments there is yet willing to sanction anything more than cosmetic progress toward democratization.
Unable to change the existing political systems in the Arabian Peninsula, the tribes there are likely to continue doing what they are best at: getting by in them. Should any opportunities arise for them to improve their position within these existing systems or alter them more to their liking, they may well grasp them - but only cautiously. They are not going to push for change that is unlikely to occur and which just attempting to achieve could negatively affect their ability to get by as they do now. A romantic view of the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula may prevail in the West. But for the most part, the tribes and those who lead them are pragmatists, and not romantics. * Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University.