Abstract
This chapter analyzes the features, trends, and issues related to governmental systems, conflicts and coercion, competition and imposition, and so on in the Muslim majority countries (MMCs). The chapter looks at the styles of governments in the MMCs, and shows how the ‘patrimonial’ authoritarian governments in the MMCs promote ‘clientelism’ resulting in ‘syncretic’ politics of coercion and conflicts. It suggests that many MMCs by virtue of their authoritarian (semiauthoritarian or semidemocratic) government style suffer from conflicts between landed aristocracy and rising industrialists, patron–client politics, ‘executive dominance’; and a symbiotic relationship between the military, bureaucracy, and the business elites. The chapter concludes that these factors resulting from external influences and relationships and the built-in institutional difficulties shape power relationships and governance pattern in the MMCs to hamper human development and need to be dealt with diligently for improvements in human development.
The author acknowledges the comments and information of Professor Dr Abdul Rashid Moten, Department of Political Science, International Islamic University Malaysia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Economic and political modernization in Europe and America had two main characteristics: (a) innovation; and (b) autonomy, such as declarations of independence on the political, intellectual, religious, and social fronts (Armstrong 2002, p. 124).
- 2.
For more discussion on the subject, please see Chaps. 1 and 7 in this Volume.
- 3.
Boix and Rosato’s said data cover the period from 1800 to 1999. During that period some countries did give voting right to some of their citizens while others gave voting rights to half of their citizens. Therefore, Boix and Rosato took 50% as minimum requirement for a country to be categorized as democracy.
- 4.
- 5.
One country, Somalia, is placed under ‘transition.’
- 6.
Alavi argued that the “over-developed” bureaucracy had been established by the colonial metropolitan bourgeoisie comprised of urban-based political elites to exercise dominance over the indigenous classes such as “merchants” and “landlord” (Alavi 1973).
- 7.
The political development before 2008 national election in Bangladesh, and recent political developments in Tunisia and Egypt are a few examples in this respect.
- 8.
Table 8.2 is composed of six ‘elements’ of democracy index, e.g. (1) election for executive; (2) election for legislative; (3) party completion; (4) suffrage; (5) press freedom; (6) human rights. Each of these elements have two points weightage (total 12 points), where 2 points indicate: “yes”(“direct”)/“free”/“Fully observed,” 1 point refers to: “indirect”/“partly free”/“some (controlled),” and 0 point indicates: “no”/“not free”/“not observed.”
References
Alavi, H. (1973). The state in post colonial societies: Pakistan and Bangladesh. In K. Gough & H. P. Sharma (Eds.), Imperialism and revolution in South Asia (pp. 143–173). New York: Springer.
Armstrong, K. (2002). Islam: A short history. London: Phoenix Press.
Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Barman, D. C. (1988). Emerging leadership patterns in rural Bangladesh: A study. Dhaka: Centre for Social Studies.
Baxter, C., Malik, Y. K., Kennedy, C. H., & Oberst, R. C. (1993). Government and politics in South Asia (3rd ed.). Oxford: Eastview Press.
Bertsch, G. K., Clark, R. P., & Wood, D. M. (1978). Comparative political systems: Power and policy in three worlds. New York: Wiley.
Boix, C. (2003). Democracy and redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boix, C., & Rosato, S. (2001). A complete data set of political regimes, 1800–1999. Unpublished document, University of Chicago.
Boix, C., & Stokes, S. C. (2003, July). Endogenous democratization. World Politics, 55(4), 517–549.
Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Goldsmith, A. A. (2002). Clientelism, patrimonialism and democratic governance: An overview and framework for assessment and programming (Report prepared for the US AID). Cambridge: ABT Associates Inc.
Clark, R. P. (1974). Development and instability: Political change in the non-western world. Chicago: Dryden.
Dove, L. (1981). The political context of education in Bangladesh 1971–80.In P. Broadfoot, C. Brock, & W. Tulasiewicz (Eds.), Politics and educational change: An international survey (pp.165–182). London: Croom Helm.
Elkins, Z. (2000). Gradations of democracy? Empirical tests of alternative conceptualizations. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 293–300.
Evans, P. (1995). Embedded autonomy-states and industrial transformation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Giddens, A. (1993). Sociology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gran, T. (2004). Professionalism in African settings. In F. Appiah, D. P.Chimanikire, & T. Gran (Eds.), Professionalism and good governance in Africa (pp. 35–62). Oslo: Abstrakt Forlag.
Hyden, G. (1973). Stat och forvaltning i Afrika. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Hyden, G. (2001). Operationalizing governance for sustainable development. In J. Jeisrat (Ed.), Governance and developing countries (pp. 13–31). Boston: Brill.
Jahan, R. (1980). Bangladesh politics: Problems and issues. Dhaka: University Press Limited.
Jahangir, B. K. (1982). Rural society, power structure and class practice. Dhaka: Centre for Social Studies.
Khan, M. M. (1991). Politics of administrative reforms. New Delhi: Ashish Publishing House.
Luhman, N. (1980). Trust and power. New York: Wiley.
Maloney, C. (1991). Behaviour and poverty in Bangladesh. Dhaka: The University Press Limited.
Organski, A. F. K. (1967). The stages of political development. New York: Knopf.
Parsons, T. (1947). Max Weber: The theory of social and economic organization. Oxford: Free Press.
Quddus, S. M. A. (2007). The unfeasibility of professionalization of primary-school teacher in Bangladesh: An analysis of the actors and factors (Report No. 100, University of Bergen). Bergen: Allkopi.
Quddus, S. M. A. (2010, October 16). Is professionalization possible within the political culture of Bangladesh? Paper presented at the Policy Research Centre (PRC). London.
Scott, J. C. (1972). Patron-client politics and political change. In N. Uphoff & W. Ilchman (Eds.), The political economy of development. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Siddique, K. (1996). Towards good governance in Bangladesh: Fifty unpleasant essays. Dhaka: University Press Limited.
Tarschys, D. (2001). Wealth, values, institutions: Trends in government andgovernance. In Governance in the 21st century (Chap. 2,pp. 27–41). Paris: OECD http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/0/17394484.pdf.
UNDP. (2009). Human Development Report 2009. New York: UNDP (retrieved online).
World Bank. (1991). Managing development: A discussion paper. Washington, DC: World Bank.
World Bank. (2002). Taming leviathan-reforming governance in Bangladesh an institutional review. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Zaidi, S. M. H. (1970). The village culture in transition: A study of East Pakistan rural society. Honolulu: East-West Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Quddus, S.A. (2012). Power Configuration in the Muslim World: Exploring the Post-WWII Era. In: Hasan, S. (eds) The Muslim World in the 21st Century. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2633-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2633-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2632-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2633-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)