One of the main reasons for the failure of Middle Eastern political systems is that their disfunctionality is profoundly logical. In short, there are very sound reasons why they don't work very well. The regimes' strength has enabled them to twist societies, economies, and ideologies in order to ensure their own survival. Repression has always been an important tool toward this end, as in all dictatorships. But the Arab world has been distinctive in the fact that demagoguery has been the regimes' first line of defense, helping to ensure voluntary cooperation by business classes, religious authorities, intellectuals, and the masses themselves. As a result, these groups usually willingly pay the price of preserving the status quo. Even opposition forces have their assigned role to play in safeguarding the system.

All of the Arab world's leaders are essentially dictators, though of course the regimes and societies vary on many points. Some are nationalist/ populist dictatorships (Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen), while others are monarchical/traditional dictatorships (Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates). Some are more repressive, and some allow considerable margins of freedom. Lebanon is the only country that can really claim to be democratic, albeit along strictly defined ethnic-communal lines. Yet it too is a dictatorship. The difference is that its particular dictator does not live in Beirut but rules from a neighboring country's capital, Damascus. Perhaps Kuwait and Bahrain have made the most progress, but in those places, as elsewhere, democratic developments are quickly reversible.