Sectarian politics in the Gulf

Tuesday Frederic Wehrey, senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Program, presented his new book, Sectarian Politics in the Gulf: From the Iraq War to the Arab Uprisings (Columbia University Press, January 2014). Marc Lynch, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, moderated.

Wehrey has a sense of déjà vu looking at the resurgence of sectarianism in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Reading the Middle East this way is not new. The sectarianism lens is an appealing way to look at a very complex region, but it plays into the hands of sectarian leaders.  They use sectarianism to justify their iron grip. Sectarianism is important, but along with other identities such as social class or nationality. It is important to look at these other explanations for conflict. The antidote to sectarianism isn’t a greater US presence in the region or good relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Ultimately, it is local institutions.

The book focuses on the Gulf region, where sectarianism is pronounced.  Gulf regimes play the sectarian card by excluding minority sects from governance.  Why is sectarianism such a prominent feature in Gulf politics?  Wehrey thinks the explanation lies not so much Shia mobilization as Sunni alarmism.

Arab commentators frequently attribute sectarianism to external factors (mainly Syria and Iran). Another interpretation is that it is a US project to play up religious differences and divide the ummah. According to some, were it not for Sunni Salafism or the Shia marja’iyya, sectarianism wouldn’t exist.  Few argue that the source of sectarianism is local politics and discrimination. That is where we should turn our attention. We should look at issues such as unemployment, provincial discrimination, explosion of social media (which can increase sectarian discourse), education, etc.

The civil war in Syria is helpful to the Gulf and other autocratic regimes in MENA.  They can point to Syria and say, “Reform leads to conflict and violence. Is that the road you want to go down? We’re the glue holding things together.”

Marc Lynch closed with some pointed questions:

Lynch: Kuwait is the absolute epicenter of sectarianism discourse where there is active campaigning in favor of  Islamist/sectarian support in the Syrian civil war. What can we learn from that?

Wehrey:  There is a great deal of mobility in Kuwaiti politics and finance, which creates opportunities to export sectarianism. Familial ties also play a role. The best way to inoculate people against sectarian discourse is political reform and inclusiveness. Frequently the problem is the existence of quasi-democratic institutions such as token parliaments that are in fact sectarian.

Lynch: What is innately wrong with taking sectarianism as key narrative to understanding the Middle East? What can your book teach us about that?

Wehrey:  Things are more complicated than that.  Sectarianism in the Middle East is mutable and dependent on political actors and institutions.  We need to analyze sectarianism at a local level, case-by-case and country-by-country, rather than through a meta-narrative.