Cooption And Coercion Research Paper

Cooption and Coercion
Numerous ways exist to describe the people of the Middle East. One can describe a people by their ethnicity, religion or sect, tribe, class, gender, and so forth. These descriptors give one a sense of identity, and the identities of the people of the Middle East have played a critical role in the politics of the region. Especially in the cases of ethnic and religious differences, Middle Eastern regimes seek to overcome those differences, not for the sake of social harmony, but for the stability of the regime. Two methods exist for regimes to deal with ethnic and sectarian challenges in their country: cooption and coercion. The former integrates members of minority groups into the government to prevent or resolve ethnic or sectarian challenges; the latter uses force and manipulation to repress actions by minority groups which could threaten the governing legitimacy of the incumbent regime. Throughout the modern history of the Middle East, regimes have used both methods to quell challenges arising from the
Cultural minorities are less able to influence the politics of the state as much as another group, even though they may have greater numbers than another group. This was the case in Iraq before the ouster of Saddam Hussein in 2003, when the Sunni-led Baathists ruled the country even though their numbers were fewer than that of Shias in the country. While the Sunnis are a numerical minority, the Shias constituted a cultural minority, as their influence over state affairs was largely limited. After the ouster, the new Iraqi government became Shia-controlled, making the Sunnis a cultural minority as well a numerical minority in Iraq (Haddad 39). Syria is another example of a state controlled by a cultural minority, as members of the Alawite sect control the regime governing the state, though they make up only a small proportion of the population (Bengio