This study suggests its own standard of classification, by adopting some previous analyses by several scholars. As a result, it categorizes ten selected Middle Eastern countries into ’Republic Bunker states’, ’Republic Bully states’, ’Monarchy of exclusive nepotism’, and ’Monarchy of inclusive nepotism’. Based on this classification, this study raises questions; ’what is the characteristics of power structure of the Middle Eastern countries and how does it manifest according to the political system?’. In order to answer the questions, this study examines the nature of political institutions of each country, the role of various political elites, and the variables of political instability not only in political arena, but also in social, tribal and religious aspects.
Consequently, this study generalizes the characteristics of political power structure as follows. As for bunker states, first of all, they share critical features that the family, tribe and religious sect of the leader exclusively occupy key posts both in politics and economy, prompted by coercive rule. However, dynamics of political relations among the elites are distinct from each other, based on whether they have tribalism or sectarianism.
Second, bully states have less autonomy in authority than bunker states. In the bully states, patronage system and crony capitalism are the driving force of long-term dictatorship. Since the fall of several autocrats, Islamic parties have received attention leaving a question whether they can grow up as political elite group. On the other hand, bully states would be suffered from instability due to the conflicts between existing elites and opposition figures, or among opposition leaders themselves. Moreover, they also would have possible conflict between Islamists and secularlists, and have economic problems such as high rate of unemployment.
Third, in monarchies of exclusive nepotism, where a certain family monopolizes the political power, the role of legislature and judiciary is quite limited. In those countries, political reform is one of the strategies to relive domestic dissatisfactions. Meanwhile, the basic source of legitimacy of the regime, and constitutive characteristics of political elites are various according to countries.
Fourth, monarchies of inclusive nepotism shows a difference from the exclusive ones, in terms of their distribution of power. When it comes to the principles of checks and balances, and limitations on constitutionalism, these type of countries have in common with the exclusive monarchies. However, the causes of political instability, including power struggle within the regime, tribal feud, and resistance of the Islamists, are different from country to country.
Finally, considering that the generalization of political power structure cannot give an answer to fully understand the indigenous features of each country, this study tries to explain unique characteristics of the countries as well.