IRAN AND DUBAI LEAD THE WAY111of 76) agreed that citizens consider subsidies as “rights of citizen-
ship,” backing up the academic claims.^45
These two surveys point to a chasm in the perceptions of the auto-
cratic social contract in the Gulf. Citizens’ feelings about their own
energy benefits diverged starkly from the understanding of experts
and the literature. Elites held a conservative view that citizens expected
the state to provide subsidized energy because it was their birthright
(or the government’s duty) to do so. Citizens held more flexible views.
Some expected free energy. Others were OK with paying the full cost,
if doing so was good for the country.
For policy makers, this finding suggested that what happened in Iran
and Dubai might be duplicated. There may be a way out of the subsidy
pyramid scheme after all.
THE DICTATOR’S DILEMMA
AND THE POPULIST PARADOXThese research findings suggest that regional elites were guilty of a costly
misreading of public opinion. In part, this is a shortcoming of autocratic
governance. Autocrats like those in the Gulf typically find it difficult to
learn what society thinks. Scholars describe it as a “dictator’s dilemma.”
Policy makers in democracies enjoy a stronger awareness of public pref-
erences because institutions offer avenues for criticism and amendment
of unpopular measures. These range from freedoms of speech and press,
independent judiciaries, and opportunities to vote for the opposition.^46
Citizens in autocracies, on the other hand, tend to be reluctant to signal
their displeasure with policy. The more repressive the regime, the less
citizens are willing to speak out. Anxiety isn’t confined to the ruled.
Autocratic rulers are likely to overcompensate. Since they lack informa-
tion on public opinion, they proceed with extreme caution.^47
The information deficit is also attributable to the scarcity of common
consultative practices such as survey and focus groups that can illu-
minate public preferences. A UAE official said policy proposals are