{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017891373801916934, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0025559105431309905, 'mean_word_length': 4.909433962264151, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On The Middle East

foundation of the states and the legitimacy of the regimes, while others question the effectiveness of the state concerning the provision of the goods and services to the people and the presence of adequate rules and institutions for the growth of a healthy economy. Still others cast a shadow of doubt upon the ability of the state to adapt to the demands of an ever-growing globalizing world economy. We seek in this article to examine some of these challenges, describe their domestic and external sources, and explore how they limit the political power of the Middle Eastern states. In particular, we employ four variables to explore the challenges that these Middle Eastern states have faced in the past and are likely to continue to face in the new century. The four variables include Democracy versus Authoritarianism, Ethnicity and Nationalism, Demographic Surge, and Economic Dependency and Economic Mismanagement. Though our list could have included additional variables, the limitations of space compelled us to focus on what we consider the most serious non-military and non-security challenges to the political power of the Middle Eastern states. Space limitations have also forced us to give a brief analysis of these challenges and problems. Our conception of the Middle East is broad and it includes Arab and non-Arab countries. According to this conception, the Middle East consists of 27 countries including the 22 members of the Arab League and Afghanistan, Cyprus, Turkey, Iran, and Israel. While we use the terms "state" and