Political Modernity 75strong bastions of communism, while some of the Sunni quarters were centres of
Arabism. Here we have another example of modern political organisation and
ideology being articulated through urban identities and solidarities.^18
The long decades of Bathist rule (1968–2003) suppressed all forms of poli-
tics outside its control, traditional or modern, with brutal and indiscriminate
violence. In addition, the decades of destructive wars and the sanctions regime
from 1991 resulted in great hardship and dislocation in the populace at large,
and pushed people increasingly into the embrace of reconstituted communal
and tribal solidarities and allegiances (Baram 1997; Jabar 2003b: 110–26).
These were to be the most prominent players in the political chaos following the
removal of the regime, and the main ‘parties’ in the fi rst elections of 2005.
The modern political fi elds and their components
The modern nation state, following on, in some cases, from the colonial state
and inheriting many of its features, established the parameters of the new
political fi elds. In the fi rst half of the twentieth century, these states followed
the framework of constitutional and ‘democratic’ institutions on the colonial
model, with parliaments, multiple parties, elections and in some cases consti-
tutional monarchies. Many of these states, such as Egypt and Iraq, continued
to be dominated by British interests during that period. The political pluralism
was partly maintained by these interests, which sought to play one party against
another. In Egypt, historians noted the tripartite centres of power between the
monarchy, parliament and government, often controlled by sectors of the Wafd,
and the British High Commission. Political liberties were precarious, with epi-
sodes of suspension of legal protections, martial law and the permanent banning
of parties considered subversive, such as the Communist Party and the Muslim
Brotherhood.
In the 1950s and 1960s a series of coups d’état in many countries in the region
transformed both government and politics. Most notable and infl uential was
the Nasserist transformation of Egypt. These were nationalist regimes (Egypt,
Iraq, Algeria, Yemen, Libya), which fi nally escaped dependence on the colo-
nial powers and established independent states. This was made possible by
the context of the cold war and Soviet support for the new regimes. In turn,
these regimes modelled themselves, to various degrees, on the Soviet example
of state socialism, the one-party populist state, but with a military elite at the
top, including programmes of land reform, nationalisation and a welfare state.
Other countries, mostly the monarchies of Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Jordan
and Iran, continued to be in the Western camp, but with equally authoritarian
and repressive regimes, only aided by oil wealth in gaining the acquiescence
if not the support of their populations through welfare perks and economic
opportunity.