This paper explores the perseverance and resurgence of tribalism as a sociological component of contemporary Qatari society. The study of tribes and tribalism has a long and storied history in the ethnographic tradition centered upon the Arabian Peninsula. That scholarly literature posited the tribe as a sociological adaptation interwoven with the pastoral nomadic traditions of the region -- essentially, tribe was principally grasped as an environmentally determined social form. With the rapid urbanization and social change characteristic of Qatar and the entire khaleej, the pastoral nomadic underpinnings of the tribe have largely disappeared throughout the region. Despite that shift, tribe remains a demonstrably important social fact in contemporary Qatari identity and figures centrally in the way many individuals conceive of their relationship to the state. Our analysis of tribalism in Qatar is grounded in a mixed methods approach that, first, utilizes quantitative data derived from a survey of 787 Qatari citizens; we subsequently utilize a series of ethnographically-focused interviews to qualitatively extend our analysis and interpretation of the data presented by the survey. The data we present demonstrate the perseverance of tribal solidarity amongst substantial components of the Qatari population, and further indicate a correlation of that tribal solidarity with higher education levels, higher income levels, and higher religiosity. Interpreting these results, we point to a genealogical conception of citizenship that provides an active lens through which a variegated and hierarchical relationship to the state is articulated. Overall, this suggests a reconceptualization of the tribe not as a vestige of a traditional past, but rather as an active and modern form of belonging central to the contestations of social power in the khaleej.

Citizenship, nationalism, human rights, and democracy are four terms and concepts that are inextricably linked. In Kuwait, the status of citizen is based on nationality, gender, and age, with women, children, naturalized citizens, expatriates, and bidoon denied many freedoms, rights, and services. Osler and Starkey (2005) define citizenship as a status, feeling, and practice. In Kuwait, the denial or limitation of the first makes the latter two all but impossible. In this paper, I discuss the tensions between citizenship, nationalism, human rights, and democracy within the Kuwaiti context and then explore how these are mirrored in the tangling of terms within the Kuwaiti national curriculum. Particular attention is paid to the Constitution and Human Rights (CHR) module, which introduced a form of national democratic citizenship education to the high school curriculum (grades 10, 11, and 12) for the first time in 2006 but was withdrawn from all but grade 12 by the 2009–2010 academic year. Students’ perceptions of the concepts and their learning will form an important part of the analysis. The student voices come from student research workshops carried out as part of a case study of a Kuwaiti government school. These workshops were carried out in the spring semesters of 2009 and 2010 with grade 10, 11, and 12 classes; a total of approximately 180 students were involved. In small groups, students were asked to reflect on what they learned in school about citizenship, human rights, and democracy and to record their thoughts on posters. The grade 11 posters were selected for this paper because they provide a contrast between the 2009 students, who took the CHR module, and the 2010 students, who did not. As the contrasts between the student responses in 2009 and 2010 reflect, the CHR module shifted the focus from education for national citizenship to education for democratic national citizenship. However, the module also inadvertently brought to the surface inconsistencies and tensions between several of the concepts it was meant to educate about. This caused students to develop criticality, and, alongside their learning on human rights and politics, was a potentially strong trigger for change from below. Its swift withdrawal from the curriculum, however, shifted the focus of citizenship education back to nationalism and patriotism. It also rendered students less equipped to effect change – a result that the more skeptical may believe was intended.

Kuwait has approved a new press and publications law in 2006, ending a state monopoly of four decades and opening up the licensing of new publications. Kuwaitis were avid consumers of newspapers already before the liberalisation of the print publications market, boasting 374 newspapers per 1,000 people as reported in 2003 by the UNDP. The lifting of access restrictions resulted in a mushrooming of new papers, and there were 14 newspapers being published by the time the 2008 elections were called. This newspaper boom appears to contradict global trends in newspaper markets where papers are losing their economic muscle in many countries, with markets stagnating, constricting and consolidating in this segment of the media. Based on analysis of available market data and interviews conducted with insiders of the Kuwaiti newspaper industry, the paper seeks to answer the question of why newspapers in Kuwait defy the global trends, and what implications these developments may have for democracy in Kuwait. Findings indicate that the newspaper boom cannot be supported by economic considerations alone. Although in times of economic prosperity there are resources for funding media, entry to the market is extremely costly and papers continue to be loss-makers. At the same time, owning a newspaper can contribute to the public prestige and political clout of the owner, which may then be translated into profitable business deals through public lobbying and putting pressure on political actors. Newspapers are also a way of emulating historically important families who have been using their papers to establish themselves as major political and business players in Kuwait. Nor are many newspapers papers alone: they are increasingly making use of satellite television, the internet, and mobile phones to spread their messages across multiple platforms. Newspapers are also a way of introducing political voices into the public sphere, and the need to be heard by the rulers, decision-makers, and the people of Kuwait is a strong motivation for starting a newspaper. In this sense Kuwait resembles the era of early newspapers in Europe and North America where the voicing of political opinions through newspapers historically contributed to the rise of democracy. Hubris, competition for public prestige, settling political and business scores, serving niche audiences, and hopes of financial gains combine to diversify the Kuwaiti media scene, thereby leading to a more robust public sphere and perhaps the strengthening of democracy.

Arab democratization has received significant international attention in the last decade. While heavily spurred on by George W. Bush’s “freedom agenda,” public discourse on the topic receded again in 2007 due to faltering progress in Iraq and electoral outcomes in Lebanon and Palestine that were unwelcomed by the US and others. However, with the ousting of Presidents in Tunisia and Egypt, as well as unprecedented popular uprisings in countries like Algeria and Yemen, discourses about Arab democracy are again on the rise. To understand democracy’s regional potential more must be known about how it is envisioned, explained, and employed by the people expected to embrace it. Toward this goal, I utilize a communication-centered approach to examine important discourses on democratization within Kuwait—where a constitutional monarchy has been incrementally and peacefully ceding power to one of the oldest and most autonomous of Arab parliaments. Findings are based on in-depth interviews with Sunni and Shi’a Islamists, women’s political activists, political liberals, and others actively engaged in defining the terms of the national political process. Interviews examined three areas related to liberalization and democratic functioning: impressions, initiatives, and ideas. Impressions of local, regional, and transnational debates on democratization were largely similar across the groups, often having more to do with national identity than ideologies or demographics. The second area of inquiry explored the mechanisms employed in promoting political and social initiatives. Digital media play an increasingly important role, but traditional media and interpersonal contact are preferred. Established political organizations were somewhat inconsistent in their interest in, or utilization of, new media, but marginalized groups have effectively combined agency with technology to gain greater “discursive capital.” The third area of inquiry examined people’s ideas about democracy in general and in Kuwait specifically. A broad diversity of perspectives exists but one consistent concern is that the country’s comparatively high level of political liberalization often impedes development and political functioning. What differs between groups is the blame for this perceived dysfunction. Theoretically, this project adds important communication dimensions to regional work in which area studies and comparative researchers predominate. Functionally, it draws attention to developments in the Arabian Gulf that have been largely overlooked to date. By examining discourses of local political actors involved in peaceful and indigenous democratization, the notion of democracy itself can be opened to important reinterpretations that integrate a unique set of Arab perspectives into its rich assortment of meanings.