Political and Economic Development in Lebanon vs. Mauritania
Lebanon since ancient times has been at the centre of crossroads of Eastern and Western civilizations. The western Greek, Roman and Christian ideals and the Eastern Persian, Arabic and Islamic ideals all coalesced in this small piece of land between the Mediterranean basin and the Arab country. Lebanon boasts of continued human existence over 7000 years and has changed hands between the Phoenicians, the Christians and the Muslims a number of times. In 1918, Lebanon was put under the French mandate of Syria till recognition of independence in 1943. Lebanon is a typical example of tribe-like politics. This small country has 17 recognized religious sects and each sect has its own area of influence and territory. These sects consist of Muslim at 59.7 (Shia, Sunni, Druze, Ismailite, Alawite, Nusayri), Christian at 39 (Maronite Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Melkite Catholic, Armenian Orthodox, Syrian Catholic, Armenian Catholic, Syrian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Chaldean, Assyrian, Coptic and Protestant) and other religions at 1.3. Each sect has differences with some other sect and these differences have led to complex power struggles, alliances, bouts of ethnic violence that led to a long civil war from 1975-1990 later giving way to compromise with a complex power sharing arrangement coalition government that ensured relative representation of all 17 religious sects. For example, the President has to be a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim and the Speaker of the parliament a Shia Muslim. This sort of constitutional arrangement has helped maintain a workable government punctuated by violence due to the involvement of Hezbollah which now has political legitimacy.
Mauritania is an Islamic republic in West Africa which has an ancient history dating back to fifth century A.D. where the indigenous Saharan tribe, the Berbers populated it with traditions and customs that dates back to the Roman Empire much before Islam became the dominant religion in the region. Similar to Lebanon, North and West Africa has seen a succession of invaders starting from the Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Ottoman, French and the Spanish. These influences permeated into Mauritania leading to a mishmash of Berber and non-Berber cultures intermingling with western cultures that French colonization brought in. Mauritania underwent a thirty-year war from 1644 to 1674 between Berbers and non-Berbers till they were united under French rule in the 1800s till their independence in 1960. The ethnic composition of Mauritania comprises of mixed Moorblack at 40, Moor 30 and black 30 all being 100 Muslim. However, this apparent homogeneity of religion is misleading because the populace consists of various tribes having different languages and customs. As per the CIA World Fact book, Arabic, Pulaar, Soninke, Wolof, French and Hassaniya are the languages spoken in Mauritania. After independence, Mauritania adopted a one party Presidential system of government that led to authoritarianism. Consequently, Mauritania underwent a military coup in 1978 that later led to allowing multiparty elections and restoration of democracy in 1992. However, the continued incumbency of President Taya from 1984 to 2005 led to yet another coup in 2005 that led to Presidential elections in 2007 followed by another military coup in 2008 and now President Abdul Aziz is in power till Presidential elections in 2014.
The political development of the two countries shows marked similarities. Both have been ruled by France for some period of their history. Both countries have had ancient history of conquests that allowed a mix of traditions and cultures that later led to clashes. Both countries underwent a civil war. In both countries, political stability is a mirage as competing forces frequently use force to gain prominence pointing to an immaturely developed political institution and processes. The major difference in the two countries is that Lebanon has adopted a parliamentary system of government while Mauritania has a presidential system. Lebanese population is more varied with 17 religious sects while Mauritania has only Islam though tribes do exist. Another important difference is that while Mauritania was officially a French colony, Lebanon escaped this tag by being part of the French Mandate for Syria. Mauritania despite being an Islamic country is one of the three Muslim states that have recognized Israel while, to Lebanon Israel is a prime adversary that has invaded their country from time to time.
Lebanese economy has always had a services dominant economy with majority of the work force being employed in the services sector. Commercial enterprise is the favored industry rather than agriculture. This entrepreneur spirit is backed by remittances from Lebanese immigrants who send Six Billion back to their country. Industry is limited to small scale sector and import-export business but together with services provides 94 of the countrys GDP while agriculture providing only 5.1 despite possessing some of the most fertile lands in the Arab world. The country has a thriving tourism industry. It was also the banking hub of the Arab world. The civil war from 1975 to 1990 had badly damaged Lebanons economic infrastructure from which the country rebounded only to be hit by the Israeli invasion in 2006 that devastated Lebanons economy especially its tourism industry. Because of constant fighting, internecine and with Israel, Lebanon today has an external debt of 156 of their GDP that hamper developmental projects from taking place. These hard knocks have made the Lebanese government take a conservative approach to fiscal policies and the economy now seems to be improving dramatically with the International Monetary Fund estimating a growth of 7 in the year 2009. Overall, despite the internal turmoil, the Lebanese have a per capita income of 6350 and a GDP of 28.7 Billion in 2010.
Mauritania is predominantly an agricultural country where majority of its population depends upon agriculture and raising live stock. The desert landscape makes for poor crop produce and the country has been stricken regularly by devastating famines. Abundance of minerals such as iron ore makes the mineral the countrys top export commodity accounting for 40 of its total exports. The country also has rich deposits of gold and copper which are yet to be fully discovered. Lacking own resources, the government has auctioned sites for external players to mine these minerals. Mauritania has some of the richest marine resources with abundance of fish. However, here too, the lack of resources and inability to police their EEZ has resulted in marine resources being exploited by external agencies. Though Mauritania has proven resources of 100 million barrels, more oil is yet to be fully discovered. In this sector too Mauritania has auctioned off blocks to foreign players. The economic development has been completely stunted with the IMF not being confident that the country will be able to meet even a 4 GDP growth in 2010. Overall the country only has a GDP of 2.86 Billion in 2010 with a per capita income of 1042.
The economic development of both the countries is more a study in divergences rather than similarities. Lebanon has benefited primarily from its geographic location that puts it at the confluence of Europe and oil rich Persian Gulf. It also has fertile lands. Mauritania on the other hand has poor agricultural lands and is located in one of the poorest regions of Africa with no real access to world markets. Though Mauritania has better mineral resources than Lebanon, it has not been able to exploit them for own use and mainly depend on exporting raw materials abroad. Lebanon on the other hand has no mineral resources but has a well developed services sector. Lebanons services dominant economy stands to gain or lose depending upon global trends of boom or recession while Mauritanias agriculturalist economy is more static. Since agricultural lands are not fertile, its economy is held hostage to the weather where severe droughts can severely undermine its economy. Lebanons GDP and per capita income is roughly eight times that of Mauritania.
The reasons for the stunted political and economic development of both the countries can be explained through the various theories of international relations. This paper shall restrict its examination only to the main theories viz. realism, liberalism, constructivism and the worlds systems theory.
The earliest reflections of Thucydides over two thousand four hundred years ago pointed to the preponderance of realism in international politics in those times. The Athenians reply to Melian plea for equality that since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and weak suffer what they must formed the back bone of classical realist theories that have influenced western political theorists over the centuries. In a later period, Machiavelli said that
The ruler of a country that is unlike his own, as I have said, should make himself the leader and defender of his less powerful neighbors and do his best to weaken the stronger ones, and he should take care that some outsider, who is as powerful as he is, does not get in by accident.
Realism as a scientific construct of international politics continued its steady march through the writings of Weber, Thomas Hobbes, and E.H. Carr and of course modern classical realists like Hans Morgenthau, followed by the likes of Stephen Waltz. The realist school of international relations posits that that human need for power and its manifestation in state to state relations where national interests supersedes any kind of morality is a reality. The anarchic nature of the world, dominance of national security rather than economic security and the prevalence of balance-of-power forces nations to adopt self help as the best course of action. Self help in such cases includes developing Comprehensive National Power (CNP) in ways that best describe the interests of the nation even if it involves resort to use of force, turning a blind eye to crimes against humanity if it does not directly or indirectly affect own state and propping up dictators and autocracies if it suits the purposes of the state. From the realist point of view, Lebanon is located in a particularly anarchic region where major powers have continuously sought to assert primacy. The handing over of Lebanon to the French under the French mandate of Syria was an attempt to maintain a balance of power in the Middle East forced by the withdrawal of the British East of the Suez. It was necessary for France to maintain Lebanon in the western sphere of influence to prevent the country from sliding into the Islamic fold or the Soviet influence that was unfolding across Eastern Europe. Within Lebanon, struggle for power manifests in the growing clout of Hezbollah that now has political representation. Hezbollahs poise of deadly opposition to Israel show that realist principles are at work in the regional struggle for power. Israels invasion of Lebanon in 2006 is a manifestation of realist policies of Israel which seeks to diminish the power of the Hezbollah for its national security. The conquest of Lebanon was also intended to send a deterrent message to rest of the Arab world to desist supporting the Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations bent on harming Israel. In the case of Mauritania, from a realist point of view, the country was militarily weak and hence could be conquered as it enhanced overall French power globally. Thus the political systems too mirrored those found in the West, Parliamentary and Presidential forms in the case of Lebanon and Mauritania respectively. Realist pursuit for power internally in Mauritania has resulted in multiple military coups but also has reflected in its foreign policy. Recognition of Israel by Mauritania is a realist attempt to bandwagon with the West to get more aid and economic assistance as also seek political legitimacy in Western Africa. It is also an attempt for an Islamic country to portray itself as a bridge between Islam and the West. Realist policies by Mauritania were put to practise when Mauritania along with Morocco invaded Western Sahara in 1976 but lost out to stronger Morocco which now occupies the region.
When viewed through the prism of Liberalism, Lebanon provides greater congruence to liberalist principles rather than Mauritania. Liberalism emphasizes the importance of individual freedom and that every person of a country has equal rights, equal opportunity and enjoys basic freedoms such as right to life, property, speech and a host of other freedoms that define the human condition. Equal opportunities and freedom to conduct ones own way of life also implies having tolerance of other ideologies and religious beliefs. Liberalism recognizes that the international system is anarchic but unlike the realist theory, which believes that power politics is the only answer to maintain peace and stability, it believes that while military power is valid, a complex system of bargaining between states can achieve international cooperation and produce peace and stability. Liberalism also believes that economic interdependence and cooperation are more conducive to peace and stability than economic dominance as believed by the realist school. Lebanon clearly demonstrates these liberalist qualities. 17 religious sects each free to exercise its own practices and equitable representation in the parliament is a manifestation of liberalist mind set. The very fact that over 5.6 Billion are remitted by Lebanese all over the world points to the cosmopolitan nature of the Lebanese people. Lebanese judicial system with its mix of Turkish law, British law, French law and the canon law and yet again portrays the countrys liberalist characteristics. Mauritania on the other hand has almost no traits that betray any adherence to liberalism. The country is wholly Islamic, follows Islamic value system and even today has vestiges of slavery prevalent despite being made illegal by the government. The only liberal act that the country has ever carried out has been the formal recognition of Israel.
A scientific theory of international relations, the World Systems or the economic theory views the world as comprised of a core and a periphery. According to the theory, the core group of nations comprises of the developed world and the underdeveloped world is the periphery. The periphery exports raw materials to the core which produces the finished goods. Therefore in global economics, according to Wallerstein, there existed two basic types of goods the core-like products and the peripheral products. In this interaction, the core employs all means necessary to maximize its gains and thus keeps the periphery dependent upon it. These means included military, technological or organizational superiority, through a long distance exchange mechanism controlled by the core that in turn decided the politico-economic dynamics of the periphery. In such a case, the periphery is just a means of acquiring raw materials for the furtherance of prosperity of the core state. The theory explained European domination of Africa quite succinctly and thus has a predictive quality in describing international relations. The worlds system theory is more applicable to Mauritania than to Lebanon. From the theoretical point of view, Mauritania had mineral resources which were needed by France and hence colonization took place. Today, the situation is no different with Mauritania still exporting raw minerals and is now auctioning prospecting blocks for gold copper as also oil just like a peripheral state to the core states of the West and to China without attempting to build primary industrial capabilities and capacities. In the case of Lebanon, one can liken the Lebanese services sector as the peripheral entity servicing the prosperous western core.
Can Constructivism explain the political and economic development in Lebanon and Mauritania To aid such understanding it is necessary to outline the main tenets of Constructivism. Constructivists reject the apriori assumptions of the realists that hold that the world system is anarchic in nature. Constructivists challenge this precept to say that anarchy in a system occurs because humans create such concepts, ideas and social structure. Alexander Wendt states that identities and interests of purposive actors are constructed by these shared ideas rather than given by nature. Constructivists say that self help can be modified. Security therefore could be envisioned in terms of human security, food security and human rights all of which required an internationalist approach based on a cooperative model. Lebanon clearly provides some congruence with the constructivist world view. Having quarreled and killed each other and the people in neighboring countries, the Lebanese have seemed to realize that accommodation and cooperation is the only way that the country will prosper. Hence, even the once considered outcast the Hezbollah have been included in the political process. The Hezbollah on its part too has understood the importance of peace amongst its brethren and have joined the political process, which in the long term will serve to modify its behavior to follow more international norms. Lebanese society as such displays a constructivist mold as it spreads into the world and seeks to integrate with it. In the long run, such a process will bring about shared concepts of national reconciliation and greater stability to the country and consequently the region. In the case of Mauritania, there does not seem much scope for constructivist ideals to flourish. Hampered by an authoritarian Presidential system, Islamic values and extreme poverty with very few resources to recover its economic status, constructive ideals would be hard to come by. Indeed, the current political and economic development and its likely trajectory in Mauritania only predict perpetuation of authoritarianism and exploitation by the stronger nations in Africa, West and the East notably China.
In conclusion, it can be reiterated that the political and economic development of Lebanon and Mauritania when viewed through the prism of international relations theories show many similarities but also many differences. Though both countries were ruled by France at some point in their history, Lebanon has shown greater resilience in inventing itself to greater prosperity. Viewed through the realist prism, French rule of Lebanon was necessary to sustain a balance of power in the Middle East while conquest of Mauritania could be explained more in terms of pursuit of global power by the French. Subsequent political actions by Lebanon and Mauritania adhere to basic tenets of realism where countries resort to any means to gain power. Liberalism is clearly at work in Lebanon as its pluralistic society shows as is also constructivism. In Mauritania, neither liberalism nor constructivism has much scope owing to its Islamic identity, poor natural resources and homogenous society. The World systems theory is more applicable to Mauritania than to Lebanon as in Mauritania governments political and economic policies still perpetuate the actions of a peripheral nation selling raw materials to the developed core of western nations. Overall, the model of international relations theory that best sums up present day Lebanon is Liberalism which may later develop some hues of constructivism. In the case of Mauritania, the model that is clearly at work is the World Systems, also called the economic theory of international relations.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment