THE quick and massive political and much needed financial support to Egypt by the main Gulf states underlines a long emerging reality that the center of political gravity in the region has, for the time being and the foreseeable future at least, moved to the Gulf region.

Some commentators spoke recently about the Saudi or Gulf era in Arab inter-politics, but those very Saudis and Gulf Arabs don’t like to be depicted that way, not yet anyway.

However, the fact is that the Gulf states have more or less survived the Arab Spring that led to massive social and political changes in a number of countries. Moreover, with the deteriorating security, political and economic situation in what used to be the leading Arab countries — namely Iraq, Syria and now Egypt — the center of gravity has moved to the Gulf which continues to enjoy unrivaled social, political and economic stability second to none in the rest of the region. That could be attributed to three main factors each influencing the other: The legitimacy of the ruling class and that has led to political stability which has helped in providing a conducive environment to carry out policies that have managed to tap into the hydrocarbon resources of these countries.

The best test of the legitimacy issue came early in 1991 when the former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein raided Kuwait; he failed to find a single Kuwaiti willing to join hands with him. That became the best evidence reflecting the legitimacy of the Sabah family that has been in undisputed rule of Kuwait for decades and decades. The ability of the Gulf states to escape any political fallout from the Arab Spring indicates the success of these countries in having socioeconomic policies that have paid off, something that is reflected in the improved standard of living of its people. These countries have become the destination of millions of Arab expatriates who have second homes in the Gulf states.

More importantly, these countries have become centers of modernity in the region in terms of availability of social services, businesses, a growing middle class and connection with the rest of the world.

This new reality is clearly demonstrated when a comparison is drawn between the Gulf states and the three countries of Egypt, Iraq and Syria, which were the first to come in touch with western powers and became the centers and pioneers of modernity in the region.

It is undisputed to claim that all of the three are at a crossroads and question marks are raised concerning the very existence of the state in these three countries: Will Egypt slide into a civil war, how will the bloodshed that has been engulfing Syria for more than two years end and is Iraq finally moving to separate along sectarian lines?

The three countries are also pioneering, each in their own way, in getting the military into politics as a shortcut for social, political and economic change. It all started with the 1936 coup in Iraq, the 1949 coup in Syria and the 1952 coup in Egypt which turned into a revolution.

The irony is that, after decades of military heavy hand in running the three countries, the tangible result was a more concentration of power in the hands of individuals be it Saddam Hussein in Iraq, or the Assads in Syria or the Mubaraks in Egypt. Saddam’s sons were groomed to take the helm. The Mubarak’s hesitation to deal with the uprising because he wanted to secure the future of his son Jamal eventually led to the total loss of his regime. In Syria they were lucky. In just half an hour the constitution was amended and Bashar Assad took over from his deceased father. A new term entered in the political science dictionary: the oligarchy republics.

This could have been tolerated had it been accompanied by tangible accomplishment. But the scorecard report shows a different story. Iraq is a showcase. With its huge hydrocarbon resources, arable land, water and relatively trained middle class, it should have led the Arab world in terms of socio-economic and political development, but the lack of legitimacy of the ruling class has affected the way it has been managing — better read wasting — its huge natural resources and put it squarely as a failed state.