Syndicate content

A half empty glass

Jean-Pierre Chauffour's picture
Also available in: Français | العربية

Have the Arab revolutions definitively rebuked the so-called Arab exceptionalism—the notion that Arab nations would somehow be immune to economic modernization and democratization? After the massive popular uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and other parts of the Arab world, it would be tempting to say yes. Far from any exceptionalism, what the Arab streets are demanding is what everyone reaching a minimum standard of living eventually demands: dignity and freedom.  This call for dignity has been a major departure from the post-independence Arab social contract made of subsidies, public employment, and various rents and privileges at the price of freedom. To use an economic terminology, the Arab revolutions happened because the “exchange rate” between entitlement and freedom became unsustainable and had to be corrected. “Dignity before bread” was the slogan of the Jasmine revolution.

But what the Arab people and  their leaders, and to some extent the international community, have yet to fully contemplate is that the social contract has to be seen as a whole, and modified as a whole.  With one side of the contract gone (hopefully for good), the other side–i.e., the various social entitlements, privileges and rents—must also go. These are the conditions for the emergence of a genuinely new social contract fulfilling the aspiration of the Arab youths.   Pretending that the newfound freedom could coexist with the past coercive state paternalism is a self-contradiction; it can only lead to populism, militarism or Islamism.  Similar to Central and Eastern Europe 20 years ago, the Arab Spring is raising some fundamental questions about the place of freedom and entitlement in development. The opportunity for the young Arab generations to learn, work, save, own, invest, trade, protect, and eventually prosper will critically depend on how the “new” Arab countries strike the balance between freedom and coercion in the new social contracts.

New evidence from the review of economic performance of more than 100 countries over the past 30 years tends to support the idea that economic freedom and civil and political liberties are the root causes of why certain countries achieve and sustain better economic outcomes. For a given set of exogenous circumstances, the respect for and promotion of economic freedom and civil and political rights are, on average, strongly associated with a country’s per capita income growth over the long run.

Yet, very few local actors in post-revolution Tunisia and Egypt seem to show awareness that the newly acquired freedom comes as a whole and should be embraced as a whole. Many would like to have it both ways—to have one's cake and eat it. Yet, to be free is to be empowered and responsible, not assisted through subsidies, public employment, trade and other barriers to entry, and various other small and large entitlements.  Continuing to prescribe handouts as opposed to addressing the root causes of the lack of economic freedom and civil and political liberties in the region can only undermine the character and ethic of these revolutions (as rightly pointed out by Edmund Phelps in a recent column). The risk is that, in the end, freedom loses and an inferior social contract looking very much like the old one persists. 

What is at stake is that the opportunity presented by the Arab Spring is gone for another generation. There will be resistance, and the social fabric may simply not be ready. Yet, one lesson of these Arab revolutions so far is that one should not underestimate the power of ideas and the willingness of the Arab youth to challenge the status quo. Let’s help them make the glass full.

Comments

Submitted by Erik on
I agree fully with his point that this is truly the remaking of the social contract for the Arab world. Even in countries that are not undergoing widespread unrest or a transition period, it is clear that Arab citizens have changed the way they view their relationship with the state. But when Mr. Chauffour refers to social entitlements, he is stepping into dangerous territory. These social entitlements include basic social services, education for women, and investments in higher education. Another slogan from the protests was “Bread, water, no Ben Ali.” This is hardly the call of a people who would like the end to their bread subsidies.

It is true that the motto “Bread, water, no Ben Ali” is hardly the call of a people who would like the end to their bread subsidies. And this is precisely what is problematic in these Arab revolutions. Not of course the provision of basic social services, education for women, and investments in public goods, but the maintenance or even the extension of various rents, privileges, public employment, and entitlements to unaffordable subsidies. A genuine freedom agenda--the type of agenda that help transform central and Eastern Europe post-1989--is an agenda that could also be a game changer for the Arab world. It involves extending freedom in all its economic, civil and political dimensions. Something that indeed the Arab street has yet to wake up to.

Submitted by Erik on
I agree that genuine freedom comes from having all of these elements. The real challenge is untangling the vast system of patronage from the legitimately effective civil servants and ministries. The real work will be in separating the rent seekers and the majority who would like their work rewarded based on what they do, not who they know.

Add new comment