Page 6 - INSS | 2019-2020

The Status of the Liberal-Democratic idea

Three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold war, the liberal-democratic idea does
not have a single global adversary that represents an opposing ideological alternative, such as communism or
fascism. However, the idea faces various adversaries that are hostile to its values, fight its institutions, and advance
a different, “illiberal” world and state order. This challenge is underway in three contexts: with competing forces in
the struggle over the world order; with subversive elements – on the political right and left – within Western liberal
democracies themselves; and with an alternative model of governance and more sophisticated mechanisms of
suppression and supervision in the non-democratic states. The liberal-democratic idea still enjoys broad support, but
various indicators show a decline in its standing and proliferation. At the same time, the capitalist economy appears
to be victorious, having also been adopted in various forms by some of the clearest proponents of the illiberal order.

The Regional System: Struggling for the Shape of the Middle East

The second chapter discusses the regional system, which continues to experience a turbulent struggle over the
shape of the Middle East. In late 2010 and early 2011, Arab publics took to the streets demanding the overthrow of a
number of Sunni Arab regimes; these demonstrations signaled the beginning of the regional upheaval that led to a
dramatic sequence of events in the ensuing years. Nine years later, the regional upheaval continues, and the Middle
East continues to be characterized by considerable instability, uncertainty, and volatility. The region is in the midst
of a deep crisis, reflected in processes of historic significance. The struggle over the character of the Middle East
continues to unfold in two spheres and along a variety of fault lines:

Over the regional order – between four camps battling over ideas, power, influence, and survival (the radical Shiite
axis, the pragmatic Sunni states, the Muslim Brotherhood stream, and the Salafi-jihadist stream). The international
powers are also involved in this struggle, and Israel too plays an indirect role.

W ithin the states themselves – between the regimes and the publics. At the base of this struggle are the region's
fundamental problems, which have intensified over the decade of regional upheaval (unemployment, corruption,
inequality, and over-reliance on oil and external aid). Over the past year, the domestic sphere has heated up
significantly, and large-scale protests broke out in Sudan, Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, and even Iran.

As a result of the struggle in these two spheres, all Middle East regimes are
confronting challenges to their stability. At one end of the spectrum are states
that remained in a state of war – Yemen, Libya, and Syria. At the other end are
states that were relatively stable, although their stability is fragile – Jordan,
Morocco, Tunisia, the Gulf states, and Turkey. In the middle are the states
where civil protests broke out in response to ongoing fundamental problems –
Sudan, Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran. The demonstrations in Iraq and
Lebanon are especially noteworthy, because they transcend ethnic divisions
and reflect an anti-Iranian sentiment prevalent among a significant portion
of the demonstrators. At the same time, the killing of Soleimani is liable to
heighten ant-American sentiments.

Israel is a leading regional actor working to limit the influence of the radical Shiite axis, and to that end maintains
increasing cooperation with the pragmatic Sunni states. Although the conflict with Israel remains a sensitive subject
among publics across the region, it is not a central issue preoccupying the regimes. However, 25 years after the
Israel-Jordan peace agreement was signed, bilateral relations deteriorated to a crisis level, a situation that demands
Israel’s immediate attention.

4 STRATEGIC SURVEY FOR ISRAEL