The Importance of Parties in the Process of Arab National Revival

Washington – Said Arikat – 4/6/2026

The discussion about party fragmentation in the Arab world, the review of party experiences, and the importance of political organization in confronting spontaneity, is not merely a narrow organizational or intellectual debate. Rather, it is part of a larger historical question related to the reasons for the stagnation of renaissance, liberation, and democracy projects in the Arab region during the last century.

Since the beginning of the 20th century, with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the emergence of modern Arab states under the umbrella of European colonialism, the need arose for organized political frameworks that would express the aspirations of Arab societies for independence and state-building. Thus, the first political parties emerged, whether they were national anti-colonial parties, nationalist parties, leftist parties, or Islamic parties. These parties played a pivotal role in leading national liberation movements and in shaping modern political consciousness.

However, the Arab party experience faced profound challenges from an early stage. After independence, many Arab countries transformed into authoritarian regimes that either marginalized parties, contained them, or completely eliminated them. In other cases, a superficial party pluralism emerged that lacked genuine competition. As a result, parties did not develop as stable democratic institutions, but often remained hostage to charismatic personalities, sharp ideological divisions, or regional, sectarian, and tribal loyalties.

Hence, the discussion about party fragmentation arises. Fragmentation is not a new phenomenon in Arab political life. Nationalist, leftist, and Islamic movements alike have witnessed successive divisions since the 1950s. Intellectual or personal differences often turned into organizational schisms that produced new parties and groups, making division easier than managing differences within a single institution. Over time, this led to the depletion of political energies and the weakening of the ability to build inclusive national projects.

However, acknowledging this problem should not turn into a condemnation of the idea of parties themselves. Modern political history shows that parties, despite their flaws, have been and still are the primary tool for organizing political participation, exchanging ideas, formulating programs, and training leaders. Almost all stable democracies have been built on the existence of strong parties and well-established political institutions, not on individual initiatives or spontaneous movements alone.

For this reason, reviewing party experiences takes on exceptional importance today. Review does not mean self-flagellation or denying history, but rather a critical reading of the entire experience. How did some parties succeed at certain stages? And why did they fail at other stages? How did internal bureaucracy and the absence of organizational democracy affect their decline? What was the role of external repression, and what was the role of self-inflicted errors? Any political movement whose experience is not subjected to continuous review is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Global political history has witnessed numerous examples of the importance of review. European socialist parties re-evaluated their programs after World War II, and nationalist movements in many countries developed their discourse and tools in response to social and economic transformations. As for intellectual and organizational stagnation, it was often a prelude to decline and regression.

In this context, the question of spontaneity and organization arises. Arab popular uprisings and protests, especially during the last two decades, have proven that masses are capable of spontaneous and rapid action when crises reach a certain level of tension. These moments revealed tremendous energies of creativity, solidarity, and sacrifice. But the same experience also showed the limits of spontaneity.

Spontaneity can ignite the spark, but it is often not enough to build an alternative. It can overthrow an existing reality, but it cannot, by itself, manage a complex transitional phase, formulate a political program, negotiate on behalf of a broad public, or build sustainable institutions. Therefore, many protest movements that succeeded in mobilizing the street later found themselves unable to transform popular momentum into a lasting political project.

This is not just an Arab problem, but a recurring lesson in world history. Great revolutions, from the French Revolution to national liberation movements in the 20th century, did not triumph through spontaneity alone, but required political, trade union, and social organizations capable of transforming general demands into programs, institutions, and laws.

Therefore, the real challenge lies not in choosing between organization and spontaneity, but in finding a healthy relationship between them. Political organization provides continuity, discipline, and the ability to plan, while spontaneity provides vitality, flexibility, and the ability to renew. When one is separated from the other, a crisis arises: organization without vitality turns into rigid bureaucracy, and spontaneity without organization turns into a fleeting wave that quickly recedes.

Hence, the urgent need today is to renew Arab party work, not to abandon it; to build more democratic and open parties capable of accommodating differences, and to learn from the lessons of history instead of escaping them. Historical experience clearly indicates that societies cannot do without organized political frameworks for long, and that the path from protest to sustainable change ultimately passes through organization, institutions, and organized political action.

In conclusion, it does not seem that the future of Arab political action can be built on individual initiatives or fleeting protest movements alone, no matter how important and influential they may be. Historical experiences confirm that political parties remain the most capable framework for organizing popular participation, producing leaders, formulating programs, and transforming general demands into policies and institutions. The need today is not to abolish parties or question their usefulness, but to renew and develop them, and to strengthen their internal democracy, independence, and ability to represent changing Arab societies. The existence of effective and deeply rooted national parties is an essential condition for building a sound political life, consolidating a culture of citizenship, ensuring stability, and opening horizons for peaceful change and sustainable development.

In this context, it must be noted that the Palestinian case, in turn, represents a highly significant example of the problem of organizational fragmentation and its impact on weakening the national project. Since the launch of the contemporary Palestinian national movement, political and military factions and organizations have multiplied to an extent that often exceeded the limits of healthy diversity and legitimate difference. Some of this multiplicity was justified at certain stages due to ideological differences or different historical circumstances, but a large part of it, over time, turned into repeated organizational divisions that weakened the unity of national decision-making and depleted human and political energies. In light of the continued occupation and the escalating existential challenges facing the Palestinian people, the need seems more urgent to overcome secondary divisions and agree on a comprehensive national liberation project that defines common priorities and goals and restores credibility to the unity of the national struggle.

No national liberation project can achieve its goals by relying on slogans or national emotions alone, no matter how legitimate and important they may be. The historical experiences of liberation movements around the world confirm that success has always been linked to the existence of solid organizational frameworks capable of managing internal differences within effective and disciplined institutions. The solidity of organization does not mean isolation or confiscation of pluralism, but rather the ability to unite efforts, direct resources, and coordinate political and popular action according to a clear strategic vision. Without this level of institutional discipline, it is difficult to achieve major qualitative leaps or transform popular sacrifices into sustainable political achievements. Therefore, rebuilding Palestinian national unity on solid organizational foundations remains an essential condition for any real progress on the path to national liberation and the realization of legitimate Palestinian rights.

Perhaps one of the most prominent lessons demonstrated by the October 7, 2023 operation, "Al-Aqsa Flood," is that organization and institutional discipline remain crucial elements in the ability of any political or military movement to create an impact that transcends its direct material size. Regardless of the differing political positions on the operation, its results, and its humanitarian and military repercussions, the events revealed that organized action based on planning, coordination, and accumulated experience is capable of bringing about major transformations in the political and regional landscape. This is a fact confirmed by all historical experiences, where major transformations were not the product of spontaneity alone, but the fruit of long and complex organizational work that was able to transform political will into effective action capable of imposing itself on the course of events. From this perspective, the need for Arab party and organizational frameworks appears more urgent, not as an end in itself, but as the means by which societies can organize their energies and direct them towards clear and sustainable goals.