{"id":{"repo_id":"ohiolink","oai_identifier":"oai:etd.ohiolink.edu:case1354387190"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/ohiolink/oai:etd.ohiolink.edu:case1354387190","repository":{"repo_id":"ohiolink","name":"OhioLINK","base_url":"https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/oai/oai"},"display":{"title":"From Diwan to Palace: Jordanian Tribal Politics and Elections","abstract":"Despite the vast research by political science scholars on the persistence of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, little is known about why citizens have not pushed for more democratic reforms. The recent Arab Spring has focused our attention on the few countries that have experienced revolt against their authoritarian leaders. Many of those transitions to democracy are still quite contested or in danger of failing. A similar scenario occurred in 1989 in Jordan when King Hussein allowed credibly free and fair elections. These elections should have led to more liberalizing reform and possible a true constitutional monarchy or democracy. Counterintuitively, they did not.This study looks at the reasons why an authoritarian state such as Jordan has remained intact. In large part, Jordan has remained a very conservative authoritarian state because of tribal politics. Tribal politics have erased the distinct boundaries between what is the state and what is private. Tribal politics in Jordan helps explain how the state is not a discrete monolith that is controlled exclusively by an authoritarian leader. Rather, over time, the state has evolved unevenly and in reaction to tribal groups who were looking to empower or enrich themselves. Different powerful tribes have captured various agencies of the state and rule them almost as part of their personal power.Previous research focuses on regime manipulations of the rules. This study offers a different perspective and set of causal factors for the explanation. While acknowledging regime manipulation exists, this case study suggests the evidence shows tribes are self-interested actors who use their own tribal sets of rules and sanctions to capture seats in the parliament. Examination of the succeeding elections illuminates how tribes are able to handle new regime rules and adapt to the new political opportunities in order to gain further power within the state.","abstract_html":"Despite the vast research by political science scholars on the persistence of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, little is known about why citizens have not pushed for more democratic reforms. The recent Arab Spring has focused our attention on the few countries that have experienced revolt against their authoritarian leaders. Many of those transitions to democracy are still quite contested or in danger of failing. A similar scenario occurred in 1989 in Jordan when King Hussein allowed credibly free and fair elections. These elections should have led to more liberalizing reform and possible a true constitutional monarchy or democracy. Counterintuitively, they did not.This study looks at the reasons why an authoritarian state such as Jordan has remained intact. In large part, Jordan has remained a very conservative authoritarian state because of tribal politics. Tribal politics have erased the distinct boundaries between what is the state and what is private. Tribal politics in Jordan helps explain how the state is not a discrete monolith that is controlled exclusively by an authoritarian leader. Rather, over time, the state has evolved unevenly and in reaction to tribal groups who were looking to empower or enrich themselves. Different powerful tribes have captured various agencies of the state and rule them almost as part of their personal power.Previous research focuses on regime manipulations of the rules. This study offers a different perspective and set of causal factors for the explanation. While acknowledging regime manipulation exists, this case study suggests the evidence shows tribes are self-interested actors who use their own tribal sets of rules and sanctions to capture seats in the parliament. Examination of the succeeding elections illuminates how tribes are able to handle new regime rules and adapt to the new political opportunities in order to gain further power within the state.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Weir, Laura C."],"institution":"Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":"Political Science","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Moore, Pete"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013-03-12","date_published":"2013-03-12","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:35:52Z","subjects":["Political Science","Jordan","tribal politics","elections"],"languages":["English"],"rights":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1354387190","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Moore, Pete"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Weir, Laura C."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2013-03-12"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies / OhioLINK"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Political Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Political Science","Jordan","tribal politics","elections"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1354387190"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Despite the vast research by political science scholars on the persistence of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, little is known about why citizens have not pushed for more democratic reforms. The recent Arab Spring has focused our attention on the few countries that have experienced revolt against their authoritarian leaders. Many of those transitions to democracy are still quite contested or in danger of failing. A similar scenario occurred in 1989 in Jordan when King Hussein allowed credibly free and fair elections. These elections should have led to more liberalizing reform and possible a true constitutional monarchy or democracy. Counterintuitively, they did not.This study looks at the reasons why an authoritarian state such as Jordan has remained intact. In large part, Jordan has remained a very conservative authoritarian state because of tribal politics. Tribal politics have erased the distinct boundaries between what is the state and what is private. Tribal politics in Jordan helps explain how the state is not a discrete monolith that is controlled exclusively by an authoritarian leader. Rather, over time, the state has evolved unevenly and in reaction to tribal groups who were looking to empower or enrich themselves. Different powerful tribes have captured various agencies of the state and rule them almost as part of their personal power.Previous research focuses on regime manipulations of the rules. This study offers a different perspective and set of causal factors for the explanation. While acknowledging regime manipulation exists, this case study suggests the evidence shows tribes are self-interested actors who use their own tribal sets of rules and sanctions to capture seats in the parliament. Examination of the succeeding elections illuminates how tribes are able to handle new regime rules and adapt to the new political opportunities in order to gain further power within the state."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf","p.293","2.9 MB"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["From Diwan to Palace: Jordanian Tribal Politics and Elections"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Moore, Pete"],"dc:creator":["Weir, Laura C."],"dc:date":["2013-03-12"],"dc:description":["Despite the vast research by political science scholars on the persistence of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, little is known about why citizens have not pushed for more democratic reforms. The recent Arab Spring has focused our attention on the few countries that have experienced revolt against their authoritarian leaders. Many of those transitions to democracy are still quite contested or in danger of failing. A similar scenario occurred in 1989 in Jordan when King Hussein allowed credibly free and fair elections. These elections should have led to more liberalizing reform and possible a true constitutional monarchy or democracy. Counterintuitively, they did not.This study looks at the reasons why an authoritarian state such as Jordan has remained intact. In large part, Jordan has remained a very conservative authoritarian state because of tribal politics. Tribal politics have erased the distinct boundaries between what is the state and what is private. Tribal politics in Jordan helps explain how the state is not a discrete monolith that is controlled exclusively by an authoritarian leader. Rather, over time, the state has evolved unevenly and in reaction to tribal groups who were looking to empower or enrich themselves. Different powerful tribes have captured various agencies of the state and rule them almost as part of their personal power.Previous research focuses on regime manipulations of the rules. This study offers a different perspective and set of causal factors for the explanation. While acknowledging regime manipulation exists, this case study suggests the evidence shows tribes are self-interested actors who use their own tribal sets of rules and sanctions to capture seats in the parliament. Examination of the succeeding elections illuminates how tribes are able to handle new regime rules and adapt to the new political opportunities in order to gain further power within the state."],"dc:format":["application/pdf","p.293","2.9 MB"],"dc:identifier":["http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1354387190"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:publisher":["Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies / OhioLINK"],"dc:rights":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."],"dc:subject":["Political Science","Jordan","tribal politics","elections"],"dc:title":["From Diwan to Palace: Jordanian Tribal Politics and Elections"],"dc:type":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Political Science"],"thesis:degree_level":["doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy"],"thesis:institution_name":["Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:35:52Z"}