Yes, monarchies work
The tragedies of Afghanistan and Iran confirm what we always knew - monarchies work better than other systems
The fall of Afghanistan in 2021 was simply the latest tragedy to befall that country, a saga which began when King Zahir Shah was deposed in 1973 after the longest period of peace and stability the country had known. It was part of an era where monarchies were overthrown, and replaced by infinitely worse regimes - Egypt (1952), Tunisia (1957), Iraq (1958), Yemen (1962 in the north, 1967 in the south), Libya (1969) and Iran (1979). The dictatorships that propped up in the region one by one managed to outdo each other for their blend megalomania and brutality against their own populace, not to mention causing trouble for their neighbours.
These regimes were based on a panopoly of ideologies - Arab nationalism, Baathism, Communism (South Yemen) and Islamism (Iran) - in which the rule of law and human life was disregarded along with the well-being of the populist. These ideologies encouraged expansionism in the name of “exporting the revolution”, which led to Saddam Hussein and Hafez al-Assad invading and occupying neighbouring countries. It has led the Islamic Republic regime in Iran to squander money on Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen. The combined result of these ideologies is misery on the peoples of the region.
Ali Shihabi has penned a very good article on this phenomenon (also published on Al-Arabiya). In the midst of the Arab Spring starting in 2011, a very good article by Tariq Alhomayed was penned regarding monarchies and their resilience. The final paragraph was thus:
“The monarchies, including Saudi Arabia, have not lost hope like these states did. The people do not revolt unless they have lost all hope, and the citizens of the Arab monarchies have not done so. The level of trust is still sizeable, or else how could the Saudi king tell his people that although things are good there is still much to be done, and that without them he is nothing? Hence, the citizen-ruler bond in the Arab monarchies appears to be greater (than in other Arab states), with the state taking greater consideration of its citizens and their demands, and hence the monarchies do not suffer from a crisis of legitimacy. Most importantly of all — and this is what we should take from the Saudi king’s speech to his citizens — is that the monarchies, including Saudi Arabia, do not disregard the dignity of their citizens. They do not humiliate or patronize them, they do not feed them false slogans, and they don’t ensure their loyalty through repression and murder.”
I feel this sums it up nicely but can be expanded upon as to why the regimes differ so much. The fact is that Arab monarchies rest upon a basis of traditional power, rooted in inherited tribal and religious tradition (which modernity has, in fact, done little to alter) and absorbing centuries of influences from the powers around them since antiquity.
What did the overthrow of monarchies in Iraq, Libya and Yemen achieve? Since 1958, Iraq has been a tragic case with consequences far beyond the Middle East. Libya fell under a similarly megalomaniacal tyrant who funded foreign terrorists, only to become one of the major crisis zones of the last decade. And Yemen, one of the most tragic of cases since 1962 and the Communist takeover of the south five years later.
It is also why the Iranian people, fighting to overthrow the Islamic Republic, have pledged their support for Reza Pahlavi. And why the region and the world must support the Iranian people in this.
The evidence is out there. I rest my case here.