Description
In the twenty-first century, Middle Eastern Christians have experienced limited political participation, discrimination and insecurity. Yet despite these conditions, Christian communities especially their religious leaders seem wary of democratization and the global minority rights discourse and mostly remain supportive of the authoritarian state. This paper puts forward two explanations for this apparent paradox. The first is that regimes are willing to delegate internal autonomy to religious institutions which allows religious leaders to preserve communal practices, liaise on the community’s behalf and minimise grassroots challenges to both religious and state authority. The second is that authoritarian states are considered security guarantors in contrast to the uncertainty of the political and security environment under alternative regimes. This was highlighted by violence against Christians in Egypt and Syria after the 2011 uprisings. Exploiting Christians’ fears of living under Islamist rule, authoritarian states garner Christians’ support without having to prioritise the community’s needs or improve their situation. Using the case studies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria, the paper argues that there is a low benchmark for guaranteed support – namely allowing internal autonomy and not openly siding with those targeting Christians – and consequently, Christian communities will remain wary of both domestic and external calls for democratization in the region.
