Guardians of the Arab State: When Militaries Intervene in Politics, from Iraq to Mauritania.

• Author: Kurt, Veysel
• Position: Book review

By Florence Gaub

London: C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd., 2017, 272 pages, [pounds sterling]30.00 (hardcover), ISBN: 9781849046480

The role of the militaries in politics in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) has been one of the most popular issues among scholars and researchers focusing on the Middle East politics since the Arab Uprisings erupted against the autocrats. It is a common assumption that the autocrats in the MENA ruled for decades with the support of the militaries. Once the uprisings began in 2010, the militaries played an undeniable role in the outcomes and consequences of the regime change demands, and indelibly affected the political transformation process. Guardians of the Arab State sets out to explain the behavior of the militaries on a theoretical level.

The main question of the book is simple: why did the militaries become political actors in the first place, in spite of the fact that they are not political actors by design? This question itself is suspect, however, since in the Arab world, the militaries have long been involved in politics, not only through conducting military coups but also in many other ways; for instance, by criticizing the executive branch with public declarations, refusing civilian orders, controlling and benefitting from economic assets, affecting the judicial system, etc. In spite of a decline in the frequency of military coups after the 1980s, the role of militaries in politics has not changed in essence. In other words, the civilianization of the MENA rulers was an illusion, because rather than relinquishing their pivotal roles, the militaries merely integrated with the governments in different models.

Let's return the question again, from a slightly different angle. For what reason have Arab militaries never ceased being political actors? The author firstly eliminates the alternative explanations that have tried to explain similar questions before. According to Gaub, most research looks only at extreme forms of military involvement, such as coups, and ignores other sorts of involvement. Some research focuses on one variable to provide a causal explanation, such as the defense budget, external dependence, or political fragmentation. In conclusion, most of the theories and arguments presented to date only scratch the surface of what military involvement in politics means in the region; they focus on regime-military relations and ignore the relations between the military forces and society.

...