Oil wealth and authoritarianism: Algeria in the Arab Spring Riqueza petrolífera y autoritarismo: Argelia en la Primavera Árabe Lala Muradova Universitat Rovira i Virgili [email protected] Abstract The “oil curse thesis” links a country’s oil largesse inter alia to the durability of its authoritarian regime. And it contends that abundant oil revenues enable autocrats to stymie democratic transition by obviat- ing taxation from citizens, buying off their political acquiescence, bolstering the repressive apparatus and thwarting the formation of civil society. This paper revisits the relevant literature by qualitatively testing its predictions on an in-depth case study of the Algerian regime in the face of the political crisis and riots of 2011. Going beyond the deterministic argument on “oil wealth-authoritarianism”, it carefully examines the strategic interaction between country-specific factors and oil wealth and studies how the confluence of these factors has shaped the survival of the authoritarian regime in Algeria since 2011. Keywords: oil wealth, authoritarianism, rentier state, democracy, Algeria, Arab Spring, institutions, political economy. Resumen La teoría de la “maldición del petróleo” vincula la riqueza petrolífera de un país con la durabilidad de su régimen autoritario. Y sostiene que disponer de este recurso en abundancia permite a los autócra- tas obstaculizar la transición democrática al obviar los impuestos de los ciudadanos y redistribuir la riqueza sin lograr una adecuada y necesaria cohesión social. Este trabajo revisa la literatura relevante, evaluando cualitativamente sus predicciones a través de un estudio de caso en profundidad de la resistencia del régimen autoritario argelino ante los disturbios políticos y populares del año 2011. Finalmente, este trabajo busca ir más allá del argumento determinista de “la riqueza petrolífera- autoritarismo”, propone examinar con cuidado la interacción estratégica entre los factores específicos de un país y la riqueza petrolífera, y estudia cómo la confluencia de estos factores ha determinado la supervivencia del régimen autoritario argelino desde el año 2011. Palabras clave: riqueza petrolífera, autoritarismo, estado rentista, democracia, Argelia, Primavera Árabe, instituciones, economía política. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 64 Lala Muradova INTRODUCTION Oil has been blamed to have pernicious economic, political and social effects for exporting countries. One strand of the literature asserts the existence of a robust correlation between a country’s oil wealth1 and the stability of its authoritarian regime (e.g. Ross, 2001; Jensen & Wantchekon, 2004; Smith, 2004; Ulfelder, 2007; Andersen & Aslaksen, 2013). According to the rentier theory (Bablawi & Luciani, 1987; Mahdavy, 1970) and the resource curse thesis (Auty, 1993; Karl, 1997; Ross, 2001), the oil wealth enables the autocrats to stymie democratic transition by obviating taxation from citizens, buying off political acquiescence, bolstering the repressive apparatus and thwarting the formation of civil society. This paper builds on the recent research in political economy on the correlation between oil wealth and the survival of the authoritarian regime2, and complements them by qualitatively testing the conventional causal mechanisms on the survival of the Algerian regime in the face of an influential political crisis: the Arab riots of 2011. The events unfolded in Tunisia, and spread to Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, Syria and beyond hugely challenged the previous theories of authoritarianism in the region, as three deeply entrenched dictators (Hosni Mobarek of Egypt, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia, and Moammar Gaddafi of Libya) were overthrown, and the stability of several other regimes of the region were acutely shaken by popular protests. Nonetheless, and against the back- drop of regional instability, the Algerian regime stood intact. Analysts and scholars attributed the Algerian regime stability during Arab revolts of 2011 to different factors, among them: redistributive patronage and security apparatus (e.g. Achy, 2012; Volpi, 2013); social memory of Algerians (e.g. Zoubir & Aghraout, 2012; McAllister, 2013); the lack of a strong and unified opposition (Zoubir & Aghraout, 2012); and the complex power structure of the Algerian regime (e.g. Benakcha, 2012). Does oil and gas wealth of the country have something to do with the stability of the Algerian regime in 2011? Does the natural resource curse thesis suffice to explain the resilience of authoritarianism in Algeria in 2011 and beyond? By examining the Algerian regime through the prism of the resource curse theory during 2011 and beyond, we will search for answers to these questions. The article proceeds as follows: in the first section we present the theoretical frame- work of our paper, by revising the rentier state and resource curse theories. Within the same section we analyze the main causal mechanisms of the oil-authoritarianism associa- tion, predicted by the political resource curse theory. Section two discusses Algeria during the Arab revolts of 2011; section three applies the resource curse thesis to the Algerian regime in 2011 by scrutinizing three main predicted causal mechanisms; section four 1. By “oil wealth” we refer to the oil and gas wealth in this paper. 2. The concepts of “regime stability”, “regime resilience” and “regime durability” are interchangeably used in this paper. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 Oil wealth and authoritarianism: Algeria in the Arab Spring 65 addresses the question of whether the oil wealth of the country alone could account for the regime durability in Algeria in 2011 and examines the fate of other rentier states in the region during the Arab riots of 2011; section five is dedicated to the analysis of the regime strategy during 2011; in section six the nature of Algerian regime and institutions are stud- ied; section seven examines the protest scene in Algeria; section eight and nine are dedi- cated to examining the sui generis history of the country and the external legitimacy of the regime respectively. In the final section, we analyze the interaction of different factors among themselves and the country's oil wealth in sustaining authoritarianism beyond 2011. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The Rentier State theory —resuscitated with the oil era of 1970s— sustains that “rentier states” are those that are heavily dependent on substantial amounts of external rent on a regular basis” (Mahdavy, 1970: 428). The reaped revenues are “effortless” and accrued rather than “earned” (Beblawi, 1987). Furthermore, the rents are external, i.e. they are paid by foreign individuals or governments. Only few participate in the generation of this wealth, and the majority are involved in the distribution or utilisation of it (ibid.); as a corollary of that, the government is the main recipient of rent (Mahdavy, 1970; Beblawi, 1987) which becomes the main factor in the state’s economy. The resource curse thesis (Auty, 1993) and the paradox of plenty (Karl, 1997) builds on the rentier state theory and link the resource abundance of a country to its eco- nomic, social and political shortcomings. The proponents of the resource curse thesis examine the correlation between resource wealth and authoritarian regime stability in resource-rich countries via Large-N cross-country studies. Most of their findings3 show that oil wealth, an important natural resource renewed for its enclave character and geopolitical importance, has a strong and perverse anti-democratic effect on political regimes, by making autocratic governments “more stable and less likely to transit to democracy” (Ross, 2014: 6). Karl (1997) asserts that the oil wealth leads to longer periods of stability and could bolster regimes. Smith confirms this thesis by contending that “oil wealth is robustly associated with more durable regimes and significantly related to lower levels of protest and civil war” (2004: 232). The claim is also consist- ent with findings of some other scholars who argue on the causal effect of oil wealth on the prolonged survival of autocratic incumbents in office (e.g. Omgba, 2009; Anders- en & Aslaksen, 2013). However the political outcomes across the resource rich countries are not homogenous: some of them have either never experienced this curse or have managed to overcome some 3. Ahmadov (2013) integrates the results of 29 studies and 246 empirical estimates in a meta-analysis on the oil-authoritarianism question and concludes that oil has robust effects on democracy. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 66 Lala Muradova economic and political dysfunction caused by oil wealth, by transiting to democracy (see, among others, Norway, Canada, Nigeria, Venezuela, and Indonesia). Thus, scholars started to question the validity of this deterministic thesis. Some of them even contradict the resource curse thesis altogether, by stating that the oil wealth-autocracy correlation is endogenous or driven by omitted variables (Brünnschweiler & Bulte, 2008; Haber & Menaldo, 2011); or they affirm that the negative effects of oil are counterbalanced by its positive indirect effects (e.g. Herb, 2005). Others argue that oil wealth could well lead to democracy, albeit via different causal mechanisms (Dunning, 2008). The most recent attempts to solve this puzzle have been on developing conditional theories of the resource curse (e.g. Dunning, 2005; Robinson et al., 2006; Ross, 2009). The conditionalists argue that, in order to comprehend the resource curse better, the conditions which shape the oil wealth-regime relationship should be better researched and under- stood. Basedau contends that exceptions and variations (i.e. Botswana and Gabon) among resource rich countries should not be treated as “lucky” cases, or outliers in statistical parlance (2005: 22). These variations necessitate theoretical explanations which, accord- ing to the author, “are most likely found in the country-specific context” (ibid.). There is no causal mechanism that works without the interference of other variables, as whether oil wealth causes beneficial or damaging socio-economic and political development is contin- gent on a “dynamic and complex interplay of a number of contextual variables” (ibid.). This author also stresses the importance of the scrutiny of pre-resource conditions of the given country, and he evaluates whether the impact of oil wealth on the country’s political and economic situation still holds significant after taking into consideration all other country-specific variables. We concur with Basedau (2005) and others on the significance of the context for the analysis. This way, we will examine the strategic interaction between country-specific fac- tors and oil wealth in order to determine how the confluence of these factors shaped the survival of the authoritarian regime in Algeria in 2011. And, according to Don Slater and Sofia Fenner (2011), we define our main dependent variable “authoritarian regime sur- vival”, as the ability of a regime to meet and overcome crises, as well as to avoid them; or in case crises cannot be avoided, to resolve them in the incumbent regime’s favour. Oil wealth is defined as a country’s dependence on hydrocarbon rents. Causal pathways of the political resource curse One of the challenges faced by resource curse scholars is to determine the causal mechanisms through which the oil wealth strengthens authoritarianism. The classical causal mechanisms of the resource curse are compiled by Ross (2001) in his seminal paper on the matter and are the following: (1) rentier effect, (2) repression effect and (3) moderni- zation effect. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 Oil wealth and authoritarianism: Algeria in the Arab Spring 67 Middle Eastern scholars (Mahdavy 1970; Beblawi-Luciani 1987; Crystal 1990) have largely contributed to the rentier effect literature. After Ross (2001) disintegrates this effect into three different parts: First, the abundance and scope of the oil revenues obviate the state’s need to tax its citizens for the state revenues. It is much easier and cost-effective for the state to rely on its external oil rents than on building an effective administrative struc- ture for taxation. When the rentier state does not levy taxes, it also ceases to represent its citizens. This argument stems from the previous literature on the bargaining nature of the relationship between the political regime and the society, underpinning important western democracies (e.g. Bates & Lien, 1985; North & Weingast, 1989). Oil windfalls, on the other hand, increase the financial capacity of the regime and enable autocrats to build strong patronage networks (Karl, 1997; Ross, 2001; Robinson et al., 2006; Sandbakken, 2006). Patronage, in its turn, wards off or diminishes the potential pressures for democratization by buying off acquiescence (Ross, 2001). Thirdly, autocra- cies also use these revenues to thwart the formation of social groups and potential oppo- nents to the incumbent regime (Bellin, 1994; Shambayati, 1994). Repression is another mechanism through which oil revenues are supposed to bolster authoritarianism (Shambayati, 1994; Ross, 2001; Bellin, 2004; 2012). Authoritarian regimes take advantage of their vast income to invest on strong and large military, police and security forces and to crack down on civil dissent. The modernization theory sustains that democracy is only triggered by a set of social and cultural changes, which includes, among other, education and occupational specialisa- tion. According to Inglehart (1997), higher educational levels and occupational specialisa- tion lead to the formation of social capital and a more organized civil society which could act as a countervailing power to authoritarian governments. Ross (2001: 337) suggests that growth based on the export of oil and minerals fails to bring about the social and cultural changes that tend to produce democratic government4. ALGERIA AND ARAB SPRING 2011 At the onset of Arab revolts, the international pundits predicted that the social uprisings that erupted in Tunisia would spill over to its immediate neighbourhood, and beyond. The list of reasons that made Algeria a perfect candidate was far from short: the country’s geographic proximity; its aging and ailing President (over 70 years old); power struggles between clans; the country’s weak economy and heavy dependence on hydrocarbon 4. In addition to the above mentioned causal mechanisms, some scholars suggested other pathways: Fish (2005), for instance, studies Russia and argues that oil hindered democracy in Russia, via the corruption it caused. Boix (2003), on the other hand, finds that the asset specificity, i.e. whether the ruling elite’s assets, acquired thanks to the oil windfall, are mobile or fixed determines if the country will have a democratic transition or not. Due to the limitations of this paper, we test qualitatively only three conventional causal mechanisms of the resource curse. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 68 Lala Muradova exports; youth unemployment reaching almost 22 per cent; social injustice; entrenched corruption; endemic inequality; and the sense of al-hogra5 among its citizens. All these reasons were strong enough to create discontent, frustration and discord between the state and the society in 2011. When faced with increasing food prices as a corollary of the new fiscal measures introduced by the government in 2011 and encouraged by riots in the neighbouring countries, Algerian youth took to the streets between the 3rd and 10th of January 2011. The rioters mainly consisted of marginalised and unemployed youth, who expressed their discontent and frustration by ransacking shops, banks, and government offices, burning tyres and putting up barricades on main roads. Algeria was not new to this kind of riots. Civil unrest, sit-ins and manifestations had already been an important part of Algerian internal dynamics. For the last ten years, almost every day in some parts of the country, one or two riots took place (Layachi, 2011). In 2010 alone, 112,878 interventions by riot police were registered officially (McAllister, 2013: 1). Nonetheless, the riots of January 2011 were different from the previous ones. The year 2011 saw the magnitude of the riots to reach: 48 wilayas (provinces) of Algeria compared to 30 wilayas in 2002 (Dris Aït Hamadouche & Dris, 2012). Their magnitude and excep- tionally violent nature shook up the Algerian civil society and encouraged several groups of civil society organisations, syndicates and political parties to come together and pub- licly condemn the violent reaction of the regime towards demonstrators (Baamara, 2012). Different initiatives surged from this cooperation and the most important one among them was a coalition, Coordination nationale pour le changement et la démocratie-CNCD (National Coordination for Change and Democracy), which was created on the 21st of January under the leadership of an Algerian civil society organization, la Ligue Algérienne de défense des droits de l’homme-LADDH (Algerian League for the Defence of Human Rights) and an opposition party, Rassemblement pour la Culture et la Démocratie-RCD (Rally for Democracy and Culture). The coalition aimed at holding a massive peaceful demonstration demanding political and economic reforms on the 12th of February. It put forward three main demands to the government: (1) lifting the state of emergency, (2) removing the restrictions on the media and political participation and (3) releasing the political prisoners of the popular protests. Different social media groups, such as Bezzef and Barakat encouraged the citizens to participate in their popular march. Although touted as a success by its organisers, it only brought together 3000 protesters (Le Monde, 2011). Unauthorised by the regime, the march faced the strong and prepared security forces of Algerian regime. As Hamouchene (2012) figuratively states, “Algiers the White” converted to “Algiers the Blue”, indicating the colour of the uniform of the 5. The expression is used to state the hatred, injustice and humiliation shown by the people in power towards the Algerian population. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 Oil wealth and authoritarianism: Algeria in the Arab Spring 69 140,000 policemen who were deployed by the regime to suppress the demonstrations organised by the Algerian civil society and opposition parties. CNCD further attempted to continue popular protests every Saturday. However it was unsuccessful in mobilising Algerian population and converting separate riots into a unified revolt. The protests were subdued and status quo within the regime continued to reign. Predictions notwithstanding, revolutionary contagion did not hold true for Algeria. The political coalition, led by the Front de Liberation National-FLN (National Liberation Front) of the ailing president Bouteflika, together with the National Rally for Democracy (RND) —of the Algerian Prime Minister Ahmed Ouyahia won the following legislative elections of 2012. The elections were hailed by the regime as the most transparent and freest ever and were backed by foreign observers. The Algerian regime, marred by corrup- tion, nepotism, continuing clan struggles and repression, succeeded in holding on. POLITICAL RESOURCE CURSE: ALGERIA IN 2011 Algeria and its economic, social and political shortcomings triggered and caused by the country’s oil dependence have frequently been studied by scholars (Martínez, 1998; Dillman, 2000; Aïssaoui, 2001; Henry, 2004; Sandbakken, 2006; Werenfels, 2007; Lowi, 2009). The country represents par excellence the typical rentier state within the definition of Mahdavy (1970) and Beblawi & Luciani (1987). The hydrocarbon industry is the back- bone of Algeria’s economy; the oil industry roughly accounts for 30 per cent of the coun- try’s GDP, more than 95 per cent of export earnings and 60 per cent of budget revenues (US Energy Information Administration-EIA, 2014). Due to the volume of oil wealth, the country is financially autonomous and does not depend on taxation from its citizens. On the other hand, as with other rentier states, the volatility of international prices of oil and gas creates financial, economic and political instability, as the redistributive policy of the country is also dependent on its hydrocarbon incomes (Bustos & Mañé, 2009). The petroleum products are one of the mostly subsidized products. The price of regular gasoline in Algeria is twice cheaper than in other oil-exporting countries, 28 per cent of the price of this commodity in developing countries and almost 15 per cent of the average price on international markets (Achy, 2013: 14). Algeria is considered to be the place of the second-cheapest domestic price for natural gas in the whole African continent. Although promulgated as covering the necessities of the disadvantaged, in reality these subsidies “disproportionally benefit the well-off segments of the population, while adding to both fiscal and current account pressures” (World Bank, 2015). Furthermore, corruption, nepotism and clientelism —common characteristics of many rentier states— have been defining features of Algeria’s politics since the nationalisation of the hydrocarbon industry in 1971. The national hydrocarbon company, Sonatrach, ironically called a “state within a state” (Entelis, 1999) has been the principal instrument Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 70 Lala Muradova of the state power. And due to its strategic importance for regime’s rent-seeking, it “has remained above supervision, regulation and accountability” (Lowi, 2007: 134). By closely analysing the events of 2011 and Algeria regime’s measures and behaviour in the face of riots, we could trace the following causal mechanisms of the resource curse: • Rentier effect: political resource curse suggests that the abundant oil revenues preclude taxation in a resource-rich country (Ross, 2001). In Algeria non-oil tax revenues constitute 10.2 per cent of the country’s GDP (Benbahmed & Lohoues, 2014). This figure is below the average indicator in emerging and developing countries and well below the ratios in the neighbouring oil importing Morocco and Tunisia (IMF, 2014). The IMF model (2014) suggests that, Algeria has not reached its tax potential and should look into reducing costly tax exemptions. Moreover, according to Algerian statistics, 46 per cent of wage earners were unreg- istered workers (ibid.: 12). Some types of taxes are even non-existent in Algeria (e.g. property taxes). The literature also suggests that oil wealth bolsters authoritarianism via patronage. In the case of Algeria, faced with extensive riots, as the very first countermeasure, the Algerian government agreed to duplicate the subsidies for foodstuff. The import of food products rose by 60 per cent in comparison to 2010 (Dris Aït Hamadouche, 2012; Dris Aït Hamadouche & Dris, 2012) and the invoice of imports reached 46 billion dollars as a result. The regime also increased salaries of civil servants by 46 per cent (IMF, 2012). At the same time, the regime decided to relax the regulations controlling the street vending in order to keep unwaged youth away from the protests. In a country where the informal economy is estimated at 6 billion USD, which represents 13 per cent of GDP outside the hydrocarbons sector and gives jobs (albeit informal) to nearly 2 million people (22 per cent of the active force) (Iratni, 2014), any attempts to hinder this business without introducing real development and employment crea- tion had proved to be too risky and costly. Furthermore, the government allocated substantial amounts of money for interest-free loans for young people. Only in 2011, more than 50.000 small enterprises giving jobs to 70.000 young people were created with the financial help of the government In sum, the Algerian government offered to its citizens more than 23 billion dollars in public grants and retroactive salary and benefit increases (Salhi, 2011). Algerian spending increased by 50 per cent in 2011 (IMF, 2012). The abundance of its finan- cial reserves, standing at 182 billion dollars as of December 2011 to be exact, enabled the regime to expand its patronage policy and easily buy off popular dissent. • Repression: faced with a looming threat following the civil society initiatives and ultimately the creation of CNCD, the regime realised that its patronage policy needed an extra parallel support. It turned to its second-beloved strategy: coercion (repression). Although the military did not resort to the use of lethal power during Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 Oil wealth and authoritarianism: Algeria in the Arab Spring 71 Arab revolts of 2011, the mere fact that the regime deployed large, well-equipped and experienced military forces to block the access of the protesters to the marches and to instil fear among the participants of the rallies and marches showed its repressive capacity. Algeria owns the largest defence budget on the African conti- nent, which Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimated to be 9.1 billion dollars in 2012 (SIPRI, 2012). In the same vein, during the years prior to 2011 and beyond, the Algerian regime used a “combination of appeasement and force” (Zoubir & Aghrout, 2012: 70) to ensure that real and independent civil society, potentially capable of mobilizing large number of citizens, was quasi-inexistent in Algeria. They were either co-opted or repressed. • The lack of modernization effect: it suggests that the oil wealth fails to generate the social and cultural changes a democratic government needs. According to United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Reports index, which measures three basic dimensions of human development —Life Expectancy Index (life expectancy at birth); Education Index (mean years of schooling and expected years of schooling); and Gross National Income per capita (GNI) index (UNDP, 2014)—, Algeria scores high in the human development index, and this ranking is not substantially different for 2011. Nonetheless, the index does not explicitly take into account the occupational spe- cialisation, which Inglehart finds vital, as “these [the increase in occupational spe- cialisation] changes produce a more autonomous workforce, accustomed to think- ing for themselves on the job and having specialized skills that enhance their bargaining power against elites” (1997: 163). Autonomous workforce with diverse occupational specialisation in its turn has the potential to push for a diversified economy, which, according to many economists and scholars, is the most effective economic solution against the resource curse (Gelb, 2010) Diversification would concurrently facilitate the emergence of diversified elites6, with diverging interests and better competence, potentially acting as a countervailing power to incumbent elites. Algeria still rejoices in the concentration of elites and power resources7 and therefore its regime model obviates the encouragement of diversification and con- tinues to rely on its “hydrocarbon-dependent” economy. CONTEXT MATTERS In the face of civil riots, the authoritarian regime of Algeria dived into its abundant “pockets” and made generous social transfers to its population in order to buy off their 6. I am grateful to an anonymous reviewer of RECP for bringing this point to my attention. 7. For an interesting discussion on the political regimes by elite types and resources in the Arab world see Izquierdo (2013). For the main reasons leading Algerian elites to abstain from developing real and healthy economy, see Izquierdo (2007). Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89 72 Lala Muradova acquiescence. The regime also resorted to its well-trained and well-paid police apparatus in order to hinder the protests from acquiring their full potential. The mere number of police, outnumbering the manifestants, their willingness to show violence, coupled with the Algerian leadership’s discourse during the days of the unrest, sent “right” messages: that the “uncontrolled change would be equivalent to playing with fire” (Hamadouche, 2012: 165). But these measures did not proved to be enough; on the contrary, riots acquired a new facet which led to the mobilisation and multiplication of civil society initiatives dur- ing the Arab revolts, ultimately to the creation of CNCD. Furthermore, if it was only the oil wealth that kept autocrats in power, notwithstanding the threats, the outcomes would have been homogeneous for all autocrats affected by Arab revolts in the region, i.e. the status quo in the form of authoritarian regimes in the region would have remained unaltered. Confronted with widespread revolts, “nearly every author- itarian regime in the region scrambled to concoct the ‘right’ mix of repression and coopta- tion” (Bellin, 2012: 127) regardless the availability or lack of oil wealth, in order to stifle the protesters. Likewise, the weakness of the civil society in the whole region had not been long the central argument of many analyses by Middle East scholars8. Algeria had similar socio-economic and political grievances as Tunisia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern coun- tries which were confronted with strong civil dissent and protests. This did not make it different either. What is more, Algeria was not the only resource-rich country in the region; the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is home to the world’s most important rentier states. The outcomes for regimes in the region proved to be far from homogenous. The Liby- an regime, another important rentier state of the region, saw itself deeply affected by the wave of revolutions which resulted in the toppling of its dictator, Muammar Gaddafi. The regime in Bahrain was faced with unprecedented opposition from its citizens despite the will of the coercive apparatus of the regime to suffocate them. In spite of the fact that oil wealth existed in all three rentier states, the outcomes for regimes were completely differ- ent. This calls for a more context-specific study of these countries9. Libya’s coercive apparatus, the pillar of its authoritarian regime survival, experienced fragmentation, which facilitated the ousting of the dictator by NATO-led intervention. Bahrain’s small and patrimonially linked military stood by the dictator (Bellin, 2012), however its insufficient capacity necessitated external support (Saudi Arabia) in order to clamp down the rebels and hold onto power. Thus, the empirical variation with regards to regime breakdown, severe risks to regime stability, and regime resilience in the region during the Arab revolts of 2011, confirms the premise that the whole range of different countries cannot be painted with a broad brush by only taking into account their oil wealth. Therefore, it would be conspicuously erratic and naïve to analyse the survival of the 8. On interesting analyses of Civil Society in the Middle East, see for example, Wiktorowicz (2000). 9. Other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries did not experience serious civil mobilisation and protests. The state formation in these countries however is intrinsically connected and endogenous to the oil wealth, the discussion of which is well beyond the scope of this article. Revista Española de Ciencia Política. Núm. 40. Marzo 2016, pp. 63-89