Overview and Introduction

The article describes and discusses the process of implementing a

democratic system in Jordan and its peculiarities compared to how Western
democratic systems have been observed to operate. It begins by defining the
term defensive democracy and puts it into the context that will be utilized
throughout the essay, i.e. economic and social. Then the author goes on to give a
brief background of the events that have led up to the need for political change
in Jordan and dedicates separate paragraphs to each individual election and how
it turned out, noting subjects he believed needed more attention such as the
state of the press and how it was affected. The essay concludes with the authors
personal evaluation on the future of democracy in Jordan and what factors might
alter its direction.
In terms of scholarly methodology, the author makes use of both primary
and secondary sources throughout the essay and lists them as endnotes. The
lack of footnotes on the other hand does make checking said sources rather
cumbersome. The reader needs to refer to the last few pages constantly while
reading as they contain explanatory notes from the author which breaks the
chain of thought in what is otherwise an accessible and logically-structured text.
A more in depth discussion of the sources will follow in the main body of the
analysis.
The author, Glenn E. Robinson, is an American scholar studying the Middle
East, currently an Associate Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in
Monterey, California.1 His background has clearly influenced his point of view as
will be discussed later in the analysis.
1 Naval Postgraduate School, NPS vita for Glenn E. Robinson, Available:
http://faculty.nps.edu/vitae/cgi-bin/vita.cgi?p=display_vita&id=1023568011, Last
accessed 11/11/13.
1

Sources
There is a wide variety of appropriate primary sources employed in writing this
essay, part of which were gathered a few years prior to its completion:
I did subsequent research trips to Jordan in 1994 and 1996, each for about a
month, which were the primary fieldwork for the paper on Defensive
Democratization.2
For the sake of categorization, they will be discussed in groups as suggested by
Arthur Marwick.3 When talking about the economic reasons for Jordans intentions
of integrating a democratic system Glen Robinson refers to data from the World
Bank, a global financial aid institution, thus avoiding local bias if he had sourced
his information from within the country. As the author explains the outcome of
the elections in both 1989 and 1993 he uses numbers and statistics from the alUrdunn al-Jadid Research Center in Jordan. 4 This center is [] an independent
non-governmental organization (NGO)[]5 so its information would fall within
the private survey section of Surveys and Reports as primary sources. Using
2 Robinson, Glenn E., Personal correspondence with author, GRobinson@nps.edu,
Date received 08/11/2013.
3 Marwick, A., The Nature of History, 3rd ed. (London: Macmillan, 1989), pp. 208216.
4 Robinson, Glenn E., Defensive Democratization in Jordan, ( Printed in United
States: International Journal of Middle East Studies, 1998, pp. 387-410) pp. 398
5 Al-Urdun Al-Jadid Research Center (UJRC), About Us, Available: http://www.ujrcjordan.net/about_us.shtm, Last accessed 11/11/13
2

figures from an NGO would be more appropriate as censorship from the Jordanian
government was not unheard of even after relative democratization had
occurred.6 Although, since this organization is still on Jordanian territory, the
author has failed to note any possibility that the numbers are unreliable or have
been tampered with.
Another primary source is interviews (Oral History) conducted by the author with
editors of major newspapers7 when discussing the state of the press in Jordan and
the control the government has over it. The interviews are not shown or quoted
at length but instead only circumstantially used in support of the authors
argument. For example, to illustrate the discrepancies between the Jordanian
democratic development and Western conceptions of democracy, Dr. Robinson
has used single phrases from the interviews to build an entire paragraph on the
editors that support the restrictions on the press. This selectiveness in quoting is
something that should be avoided when writing critical history as it undermines
the credibility of the argument in the eyes of the reader. 8 Also, the author
defends the position of these editors in the following paragraph but doesnt
elaborate on their motives for doing so, taking them at face value.
Thirdly, the author has consulted local Jordanian newspapers as well as western
ones9 which fall under the Media of communication-type of primary source. This
allows the author to build a picture of the then-current mood in Jordan during the
elections. There is no additional information about whether or not they were
6 Robinson (1998, pp. 395)
7 Robinson (1998, pp. 396)
8 Samely, A., Ground Rules Historiography, Unpublished Lecture Notes MEST
20011, (University of Manchester, 2013) 1.4
9 Robinson (1998, pp. 404)
3

consulted in the original language which is important to take into account when
considering their value. Also, as the author himself has stated, the press was still
formally under the governments control so this means that the information
contained should have been used in a more critical fashion but on the other hand
it could illustrate how freedom of press was being handled during the
liberalization process.
Finally, the author focuses on the Press and Public Publications Law (Guides
and Works of Reference) to elaborate and support the social aspect of his
argument, specifically Articles 21 and 40.10 The former expressly forbade any
party from having financial or organizational ties to any outside body which
could be used to shut down practically any party that had ties with Palestinians
and the latter making illegal any publication that offends the Jordanian Royal
Family, heads of state, accredited diplomats, the security forces and other people
in positions of power or on friendly terms with the ruling elite. While scrutinizing
the limitations on the press and discussing the value of journalistic freedom in a
democracy, Dr. Robinson also takes into account the fact that Jordan is a country
to which the concept of liberalization is something relatively new in practice and
should be allowed time to grow into the role it must play in any democracy. 11
Although there is still the prevalent Western overtone in terms of language
choice, showing awareness of both sides of the argument benefits the integrity of
the authors case in point.
When it comes to secondary sources, the author has referenced various scholarly
articles throughout his essay, mainly when building the introduction to his
discussion of defensive democratization. Their primary function is to contribute to
10 Robinson (1998, pp. 395)
11 Robinson (1998, pp. 397)
4

the economic, social and political background from which the author has
developed his reasoning or to refer the reader to examples of specific concepts in
other scholars works for clarification. No popular sources are used which gives
the article academic trustworthiness in that respect. 12 A point to make is that
because of the cross-disciplinary scope of the topics referred to through the
secondary sources, the critical reader will need to do sufficient extra reading if he
is to assess whether or not the economic and sociological theories quoted by Dr.
Robinson are appropriate and if he has not been selective in his choice of
secondary sources. This is of importance because the author is willing to favor
certain articles, giving them descriptions such as [] best statement of this
approach [] without giving reason for this preference. 13 On one occasion one of
the endnotes makes an analogy to a similar case as the authors defensive
democratization which occurred in Africa but only specifies the name of the
person who talked about virtual democracy with no reference to the work the
term was discussed in, place of origin or credentials of the scholar who coined
it.14 Irrelevant of the motives behind this omission, it shows a partially incomplete
approach to referencing.
On the whole the style and manner of referencing is up to par, with secondary
sources being used to provide the circumstances that the authors theory stems
from while primary sources are cited so as to inform and back the main
arguments which results in a cohesive and academically-sound progression of
assertions leading to a conclusion. The only issues are some improperly
referenced secondary sources and also a lack of cited primary sources with a
12 Rampolla, M. L., A Pocket Guide to Writing History, 6th ed. (Boston, New York:
Bedfort/St. Martins, 2010), pp. 17
13 Robinson (1998, pp. 408, cit. 10)
14 Robinson (1998, pp. 408, cit. 14)
5

publication date prior to the 1990s but an acknowledgement that Jordans

tumultuous past has an influence on how the liberalization process is
developing.15
Language
With regards of choice of language and position on objectivity, it is clear that the
author has written the essay from an almost exclusively Western position,
discussing Jordans attempts at implementing a democratic system in terms of
how a democratic system is perceived in the West although he notes that the
factors that have led up to the change in political system are different. 16
To talk about the 1989 election, Dr. Robinson uses the phrase filled with a
number of oddities

17

with which he refers to the fact that individuals had to run

individual platforms since political parties were not yet legal. Although it is true
that it is definitely a different approach, the concept of a democracy is a foreign
one for Jordan altogether and that it should be expected for the ruling power to
adapt it to their own countrys needs and mindset. The author mentions that the
brief campaign passed while martial law was still in effect as part of the
oddities but doesnt talk about what a shock a political change of such a
magnitude could mean for civil safety or elaborate at all on the reasons behind
the presence of the security forces.
Another aspect to note is the use of a specific word, interesting, which
most clearly shows the authors implied Western point of view. It is first used to
refer to two aspects of the 1992 law that legalized political parties in Jordan one
15 Robinson (1998, pp. 397)
16 Robinson (1998, pp. 388)
17 Robinson (1998, pp. 392)
6

of which was the aforementioned Article 21 and the second being the allusion
towards giving Palestinians in Jordan a choice of either Jordanian or Palestinian
citizenship. Both these features are completely natural to occur in a country such
as Jordan which has a considerable Palestinian community and the ruling elite
wants to weaken the influence that community has in the new political system
thats being introduced. The importance of national identity and allegiance in a
country like Jordan is expected to have an influence on their own brand of
democracy and would hardly be noted by local historians as interesting if at all.
Further on in the text, while talking about the state of the press and the
continuing restrictions imposed on it, Dr. Robinson finds it more interesting 18
how easily some editors have accommodated and rationalized these further
restrictions. While the editors themselves see nothing special in the constraints
that have remained and can justify them in lieu of the novelty of the democratic
system in Jordan, from a Western point of view it is definitely understandable why
the author thought it worthy of mention. In the subsequent paragraph he tries to
show the Jordanian attitude towards these restrictions but quite an obvious
change of language occurs and he uses the impersonal constructions One could
interpret [] and One can also accept []. These show quite a clear contrast
in presenting the argument from the local point in a detached, unconvinced
manner.19 While discussing the elections though, Dr. Robinson shows awareness
by saying:

18 Robinson (1998, pp. 396)

19 Robinson (1998, pp. 397)
7

None of this should suggest that the election was a sham. It was, in fact,
relatively free and fair, with abuses not noticeably different from those in many
democratic elections elsewhere.20
This points to the fact that the author realizes that some issues are not special to
this developing democracy but common in other nations as well, showing a more
flexible approach.
Another prevailing feature of the authors language that is noticeable
throughout the text is his propensity for vague or general statements with no
explanatory notes or further consideration. While admitting that he only offered a
necessarily brief overview21 of the economic and social conditions which
influence political change, he then goes on to say that virtually all scholars
agree on the importance of some form of transition in society to facilitate the
process. Who are these scholars and how one can make such sweeping
generalization are not elaborated upon. Further on the author talks about the
pervasive image of Jordanian politicians in comparison to how Islamist
candidates often were seen. This could pass as an Oral History primary source or
personal reminiscence of observations made while conducting research prior to
writing the essay but neither would be academically sound since the period Dr.
Robinson is referring to is recent enough to offer more convincing sources. Also,
these phrases could still fit appropriately into the context of the argument if
corroborating evidence was referenced such as newspapers, magazines,
interviews, video recordings, etc. 22 He provides such evidence in one of the

20 Robinson (1998, pp. 399)

21 Robinson (1998, pp. 389)
22 Samely (2013, 1.5)
8

endnote citations where he says that a verbal claim (interview) has been
confirmed by others.

23

Conclusion
Although an essay written for a specific audience that exemplifies a
Western approach to Middle Eastern politics, the author has presented sufficient
arguments and examples to illustrate the Jordanian position as well. An attentive
scholarly reader can find the necessary information in the article to get to grips
with what the political situation was like during the time it was written and
because of the well-structured and informative citations, one can gain an
understanding of the topic quickly. A less vague writing style would benefit the
text in terms of academic rigor but the pertinent primary research is enough to
make the text a genuinely useful work on the democratization process in Jordan.

Bibliography
1. Al-Urdun Al-Jadid Research Center (UJRC), About Us, Available:
http://www.ujrc-jordan.net/about_us.shtm, Last accessed 11/11/13
2. Marwick, A., The Nature of History, 3rd ed. (London: Macmillan, 1989)
3. Naval Postgraduate School, NPS vita for Glenn E. Robinson, Available:
http://faculty.nps.edu/vitae/cgi-bin/vita.cgi?p=display_vita&id=1023568011,
Last accessed 11/11/13.

23 Robinson (1998, pp. 409, cit. 33)

9

4. Rampolla, M. L., A Pocket Guide to Writing History, 6th ed. (Boston,

New York: Bedfort/St. Martins, 2010)
5. Robinson, Glenn E., Defensive Democratization in Jordan, ( Printed in
United States: International Journal of Middle East Studies, 1998, pp.
387-410)
6. Robinson, Glenn E., Personal correspondence with author, GRobinson@nps.edu,
Date received 08/11/2013.

7. Samely, A., Ground Rules Historiography, Unpublished Lecture Notes

MEST 20011, (University of Manchester, 2013)

10