Those who follow what is taking place in a number of Arab countries, and especially the struggles in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen, are experiencing two feelings at the moment. They are feeling anxiety, and they are also acknowledging the power of popular protests to monitor and correct the performance of new rulers during a time of transition. There will be a difficult period of “labor pains" lasting several years before developments stabilize in these countries, and until the political and social developments that led to the various uprisings can be dealt with. Anyone who monitored the elections in Kuwait, which were preceded by protests and a boycott by the opposition, and were followed by the opposition's demand that the new, loyalist-dominated Parliament be dissolved, would be anxious about the stability of the political formula that governs the country. Kuwait has been a forerunner in the Gulf when it comes to democracy, but observers should be worried. Heated political rhetoric is now dominant in the wake of Saturday's election - the second round in less than 10 months - after the legislature was dissolved under the pretext that the opposition enjoyed a clear majority in February. This, it was argued, would block the government's development projects, because of the unaccustomed-to political rhetoric that was being seen in the country. The approach to dealing with the popular protest movement in Kuwait in light of the Arab Spring has been unrealistic, because the overwhelming majority of Kuwaiti society lives under conditions of prosperity. This is thanks to the unique system of government assistance, in terms of free education up to university, medical treatment, hospitalization, and subsidies on foodstuffs and all services. One must search for the reasons behind this popular movement, which has shaken political stability since 2006, leading to the dissolution of the legislature on five separate occasions. In the interest of objectivity, one should say that the prosperity enjoyed by Kuwaitis, aided by the ruling family's openness and desire to see its people benefit from the small state's natural resource wealth, has produced a class of educated and skilled people from segments of society that were previously marginalized. These people have entered the state bureaucracy, the private sector and the political arena; these rising groups, which rely on tribal and regional forces, or political and sectarian orientations, have begun striving to participate in the political system. It is a natural development in a society that has made qualitative jumps that result from its various aspects of diversity, and generate opposition forces, and a renewal of the political class. In addition, also in the interest of objectivity, one should draw a conclusion when it comes to Saturday's elections and the boycott by the opposition. The boycott was called for under the pretext of an objection to the election law that contained a decree issued by the emir, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah, stipulating one person, one vote instead of the earlier system of one person, four votes (for four different candidates). Both the opposition and the loyalists achieved political results from their duel. The loyalists managed to secure a 40 percent turn-out despite the boycott, which was more than half of those who voted in February (58 percent), when the opposition received a majority. This means that about two-thirds of those who voted in February cast their ballots, as a substantial number failed to heed the boycott call. Some of this behavior is due to the fact that those who did not abide by the boycott – even though they helped give the opposition victory in the previous round – were put off by the “rough language" of some opposition figures, even though they support some of their ideas and proposals. Specifically, these politicians exceeded the acceptable norms of Kuwait in criticizing the country's emir and ruling family, prompting a considerable number of Kuwaitis to show up at the ballot boxes. Meanwhile, the opposition can say that at the least, it sent a message to the authorities, namely that it can muster a third of the voting bloc in the earlier polls, which is a sizeable group, indicating that a wide segment of the population agrees with the opposition, irrespective of the latter's doubts about the official turn-out figures. These two conclusions constitute a challenge for both sides, with the re-naming of Sheikh Jaber Mubarak, known for his readiness to show openness to the opposition, to head a new government. The challenge for the government is to respond positively to the boycotters, because ignoring them will increase their ranks, and generate more protests. In contrast, dealing with them positively could see the country's political conflict cool down. The efforts to form the government that resigned last year indicate that an approach of this type is possible. The authorities offered the opposition five or six Cabinet positions, but the latter insisted on nine portfolios out of a total of 15. The challenge for the opposition, meanwhile, is to rationalize its political rhetoric and define a ceiling for its political goals, representing its diverse tribal and ideological components. It should also cut back on its mass actions, which requires courage and a bit of realism on the part of the leaders of the opposition. Kuwait needs to come up with a political formula that meets the demands of stability, which was responsible for the country's prosperity.
