Table Of ContentLIST OF TABLES
Table 8.1. SGI scores grouped into bands 153
Table 8.2. Quality of democracy 155
Table 8.3. Corruption Perceptions Index 2013 156
Table 8.4. Policy performance 158
Table 8.5. Executive capacity 159
Table 8.6. Executive capacity 161
Table 8.7. SGI ranking by aggregate scores 170
PREFACE
The sovereignty of nation-states and their ability to prescribe rules of
behaviortopopulationsonterritoriesundertheirnominalcontrol have
been challenged by many recent developments, including the so-called
ArabSpring, the resurgence of people poweraided by new information
technologies and global media, the selective intervention by the
international community in humanitarian crises, transnational activist
networksboundbylooselysharedideas,andintegrationprojectseroding
borders. Assaults on the old ideas of sovereignty from all directions
appear to be even more acute than during the 1990s following the end
of the Cold War.
Ontheotherhand,manystateleadersinthetwenty-firstcenturyhave
been quick to adapt to the changing conditions in order to ensure the
primacy of statism by exploiting divisions, processes of cooptation and
informal contractual arrangements within their individual countries
andthechanginginternationalorderor,assomemightclaim,disorder.
They have shown a remarkable capacity to survive and maintain the
traditionalmodelofstate–societyrelations,includinginitsconservative
corporatistvariant.Forexample,whileseveralauthoritarianArabstates,
some with limited legitimacy and some dependent on rentier income,
have experienced regime change, similar entities in Central Asia or
Africahave continued to thrive. Despite Western bouts of emphasis on
indigenous democratization as a firm foundation for stability and
prosperity, the world continues to be dogged by many cases of weak
states and strong societies or the reverse of this paradigm. This is
witnessedinallcontinentsinoneformoranother – afactwhichislikely
x WEAK STATES, STRONGSOCIETIES
to have historical longevity in influencing the shaping of the
international situation and which needs to be taken on board in any
quest to generate a viable world order.
With a focus on the issue of “weak states and strong societies,” the
multitude of ways in which this phenomenon exists and functions
against the background of global and regional influences constituted
the subject matter of a discussion at a two-day workshop, which was
convenedattheUnitedNationsUniversity,Tokyo,on23to24January
2014.Drawingtogetherprominentexpertsfromvariousdisciplinesand
zonesofareastudies,theproductisthepresenteditedvolume,withits
focus on a richly textured analysis of state–society dynamics in the
changingworld.Giventhecomplexityandmulti-dimensionalnatureof
thesubject matter,the authorsof the volume’s chapters werenot given
anyspecificguidelinestowhichtheyshouldadhere,apartfromaconcept
page. They were given the freedom to adopt their own approaches, but
within the broad perimeters of the concept page.
Iamverythankfultoallthecontributorstothevolumewhoworked
with me closely, cooperatively and patiently.
The whole enterprise is supported by the One Earth Future (OEF)
Foundation, the United Nations University (UNU) and the Australian
National University (ANU). I am very appreciative of them and
Professor Ramesh Thakur, the Editor-in-Chief of the journal Global
Governance, for initially suggesting this project and encouraging me
to take it on.
I am also indebted to a number of individuals for their support.
Amongstthem,firstofall,Imustexpressmydeepgratitudetomyvery
intelligent, able and dedicated research assistant, Stephanie Wright,
without whose valuable editorial assistance I would not have been able
to prepare this volume for publication within a reasonable time,
Dr David Malone, Rector of UNU, who graciously opened and hosted
our workshop, and Dr Conor Seyle, Associate Director of Research
Development, OEF, for being supportive of the project every step of
the way.
I also owe much to Dr Raihan Ismail for helping with the
organizationoftheworkshop,andtheprofessionalstaffofourCentrefor
Arab and Islamic Studies (the Middle East and Central Asia),ANU, in
particular Lissette Geronimo, Anita Mack and Tamara Ley, who is now
working in another part of the ANU.
PREFACE xi
Last,butnotleast,IamverydeeplygratefultoMary-LouiseHickey,
whoasaveryaccomplishededitorinherownright,helpedmewiththis
volume,as she has withevery other publication thatI have worked on.
She is my kind, generous and loyal partner.
Amin Saikal
Canberra, March 2015
CONTRIBUTORS
Christopher Bickerton is a lecturer in the Department of Politics and
InternationalStudies,andOfficialFellowatQueen’sCollege,University
of Cambridge.
Richard Falk is Research Professor at the Orfalea Center for Global &
International Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, and
Albert G. Professor of International Law and Practice Emeritus,
Princeton University.
Karima Laachir is Senior Lecturer in the Department of the Languages
and Cultures of Near and Middle East, SOAS, at the University of
London.
KirillNourzhanovisSeniorLecturerintheCentreforArabandIslamic
Studies (the Middle East and Central Asia), College of Arts and Social
Sciences, at the Australian National University.
JideMartynsOkekeisacivilianexpertintheplanninganddeployment
of peace support operations at the African Union Commission, and
VisitingResearchFellowattheDepartmentofInternationalRelations,
University of Witwatersrand, South Africa.
VesselinPopovskiisSeniorAcademicProgrammeOfficerattheUnited
Nations University, Tokyo.
CONTRIBUTORS xiii
Pia Riggirozzi is Associate Professor in Politics and International
Relations at the University of Southampton.
AminSaikalisDistinguishedProfessorofPoliticalScienceandDirector
oftheCentreforArabandIslamicStudies(theMiddleEastandCentral
Asia), College of Arts and Social Sciences, at the Australian National
University.
Carlyle A. Thayer is Emeritus Professor, The University of New South
Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra.
Sven van Kerckhoven is a PhD fellow at the Leuven Centre for Global
Governance Studies, at KU Leuven.
Maarten Vidal is a doctoral researcher at the Institute of International
Law, KU Leuven, and legal advisor to the Flemish Department of
Foreign Affairs.
Jan Wouters holds the Jean Monnet Chair ad personam EU and Global
Governance, and is the Director of the Leuven Centre for Global
Governance Studies and the Institute for International Law, at KU
Leuven.
Stephanie Wright is a graduate scholar at the University of California,
Santa Barbara.
ABBREVIATIONS
AMISOM African Union Mission in Somalia
ARPCT Alliance for Restoration of Peace and Counter terrorism
AU African Union
EU European Union
FLN National Liberation Front
GDP gross domestic product
GCC Gulf Cooperation Council
ICU Islamic Courts Union
IFES International Federation for Electoral Systems
IRPT Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan
ISIS Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
MENA Middle East and North Africa
NGO nongovernmental organization
OECD Organisationfor EconomicCooperation and Development
OSCE Organization for Security andCooperation inEurope
PAP People’s Action Party
PPP purchasing power parity
SGI Sustainable Governance Indicators
SNSF SomaliNational Security Forces
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
INTRODUCTION
Amin Saikal and Stephanie Wright
Theissueofaweakstate,withastrongsocietyorviceversa,hasbeenthe
subjectofagreatdealofscholarlydebateinthestudyofdevelopment,and
the state–society relationship in developing countries, for quite some
time.SincetheendofthedivisionofEuropeandworldbipolaritycloseto
three decades ago, a number of critical developments have significantly
altered the geopolitical landscape and raised new questions about the
nature of the state–society relationship. They have included: the fall of
Sovietcommunism;thecrisisofneoliberalismasembodiedinwhatJohn
Williamsoncoinedin1989astheWashingtonConsensus;1thespreadof
“disrupted or failed states”2 and the unleashing of numerous ethno-
nationalist,sectarianconflictsandagovernabilitycrisis;therapidadvance
of globalization and technological progress, fostering deeper and faster
interdependence between nation-states; the rise of transnational and
international organizations as more or less independent actors; and the
emergence of new security threats and ungoverned or alternatively
governed regions. More broadly, the global political landscape has been
substantially altered by what Joseph Nye calls “power transition” from
one dominant state (the US) to another (China) and “power diffusion,”
denotingthesidewaysmovementofpowertosub-national,anti-systemic
groups,includingsuchnetworksandentitiesasal-QaedaandIslamicState
of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).3
These changing regional and global contexts have generated a
renewedneedtoinvestigatetheparadigmof“weakstate,strongsociety”
2 WEAK STATES, STRONGSOCIETIES
in world politics, especially since the 1991 disintegration of the Soviet
Union and the end of the Cold War as we knew it.4
Workingwiththeframeworkoftreatingbothstatesandsocietiesas
complexes rather than singular units, this volume focuses on the
paradigm of “weak states and strong societies” across a wide but not
exhaustiverangeofregionalcontexts.Insodoing,itseekstoprovidean
in-depthdiscussionofwhatconstitutesaweakorstrongstate,andweak
or strong society, by focusing on a number of case studies covering
differentpartsoftheworld,inordertoexaminethevalidityorotherwise
ofthecoreelementsofwhatiselaborateduponintheconceptualchapter.
Throughthesecasestudies,thevolumeoffersnewinsightsintothestudy
of the state–society relationship in the contemporary international
environment. By examining how and under what influences the state–
society relationship has been configured across a variety of national and
regional contexts, the volume sheds light on a far wider set ofdynamics
and factors ostensibly peripheral to, but nevertheless consequential to,
contemporarystate–societyrelationships,aswellastheimpactofthesein
world politics. These factors include: sub-state entities; international/
regional states and external actors;transnational orregional entities; and
“informal” elements in civil society such as clan groups or local power-
holders or “warlords.” In addition, this compilation considers, wherever
necessary, the wider landscapes – whether geographic, religious, ethnic,
racial, linguistic, sectarian, historical, cultural, or economic – in which
state–society relationships take shape and evolve.
From a comparative perspective, these dynamics are critical in
deepeningourunderstandingofcommonalitiesanddifferencesbetween
states and societies in the twenty-first century. At the same time, they
force us to question the adequacy of existing concepts such as strong/
weak,orindeedstate/society.Asthisvolumedemonstrates,thecleanness
of the division implied by these dyads is misleading. State actors are
embeddedinsocialcontexts,andsocialactorscanbothinfluenceandbe
influencedbythestate.Statesmaybe“strong”intermsoftheirabilityto
control society through use of force, but weak in terms of legitimacy.
Societies, on the other hand, can be weak from the perspective of
resistancetothestate,butstrongintermsoftheprovisionofservicesor
the maintenance of collective identities. Similarly, it is rare that any
“state”or“society”attainstothelevelofunityandcohesivenessimplied
bythesingularversionsofthoseterms.Morecommonly,bothstateand
