The general view is that, in last Saturday’s general election in Kuwait, the “liberals” were the biggest losers. One self-styled liberal group lost all three of its members in the outgoing national assembly. The electorate also ignored several other prominent, and media-savvy, candidates regarded as liberals.
But does this mean that Kuwait has given the thumbs-down to liberal ideas? Does the first free election to be held in an Arab country after the liberation of Iraq reflect an anti-Western mood? The short answer to both questions is: No.
Liberalism in the American sense means a cocktail of state intervention in shaping the economy, a comprehensive welfare system, and a good dose of political correctness — all with a bit of anti-Americanism as the cherry on top. In its European sense, however, liberalism means limiting the role for the state, an emphasis on individual rights and private enterprise, and support for free trade in a global market economy.
In both its American and European senses, liberalism also means not only tolerance for but also active encouragement of alternative life-styles, support for equal rights for all minorities, and a belief in the relativity of cultural and religious values. The Kuwaiti “liberals” do not believe in any of that and did not offer anything resembling a liberal social, political and economic program. In fact, the reason for their failure is that they were not liberal at all. At least 20 of the 50 newly elected members of the National Assembly are closer to the Western definition of a liberal than were most of the defeated “liberal” hopefuls.
Although there is little open and frank debate, it is possible to distinguish three currents in Kuwaiti politics.
The first current represents the conservatives, both tribal leaders and wealthy merchants closely linked with at least one section of the ruling family. They believe that all that Kuwait needs to do is to maintain the status quo and stay out of regional and international trouble. This current opposes the extension of franchise to women, supports the state’s dominant position in the economy, and favors emphasizing Kuwait “Arab personality”. That current appears to have won some 20 seats in the new parliament.
The second current represents the so-called Islamists, subdivided into several groups. The Sunni Islamists are divided into the supposedly moderate “Muslim Brotherhood”, which failed to win a single seat, and the more hard-line Taleban-style movement that captured two seats. The Shiites, accounting for 20 percent of the electorate, chose mostly moderate politicians, rejecting the hard-line candidates linked to the Iranian mullas. All in all 21 members have been labeled as Islamist. But only three seek an Islamic system in which the Shariah would replace the present constitution. On the issue of extending the franchise to women, at least half of the elected Islamists say they would vote in favor. The reason is that they believe women, if granted the right to vote, will choose religious candidates. The Islamist current is also divided on issues of foreign policy. At least three new members are bitterly anti-American while almost all others regard an alliance with the US as necessary.
The third current could be described as reformist. It supports massive privatization, a reduction in the role of the state in the economy, and a review of the increasingly costly policy of state subsidies for almost everything. The reformist current also wants the franchise to be extended to women and the age of voting reduced from 21 to 18. The reformists also seek a greater parliamentary oversight of the government, a reduction in current state expenditure, and a massive campaign against corruption.
All in all, the new Parliament appears better placed to produce working majorities in support of a number of controversial reforms. Chief among these is the privatization program that has been on the backburner since 1992. It is also possible that, the new Parliament will extend the franchise to women. With such prospects it is hard to sustain the claim that the new Parliament represents a setback for Kuwaiti democracy. On the contrary, the new Parliament may prove to be more supportive of a free enterprise economy, more socially tolerant and even more pro-West.
