The quasi-Westphalian states and the continuation of the cycle of violence in the Middle East
When a government falls in the Middle East, war and ethnic and religious violence begin; Like what we see in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen and Libya. Before the formation of the state, in what is now called the Middle East, Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens, Persians and… Muslims, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and Yazidis lived in a better and more durable coexistence than today. It seems that after the emergence of new governments on the eve of the First World War, there is not much news about this coexistence.
The question is, what is the relationship between the nature of the quasi-Westphalian states and the lack of coexistence between ethnic and religious identity units in the Middle East?
The answer to this question should be sought in the nature of the current governments in this region. These governments; Both in form and content, it always carries with it violence; They have been and are against their subordinates, that is, ethnic and religious identity units, both within their territory and against their neighbors outside their borders.
The historical and experimental pattern in many Middle Eastern countries shows that the Middle Eastern governments in the framework of modernity’s quasi-Westphalian order need power as life-giving oxygen to protect themselves against internal and external opposition actors. The important issue is that the power in the hands of the rulers of these countries is unprotected, and this means that it is possible at any moment that they use this power in a violent way against their opponents.
Although this violence was and still is an inseparable and essential part of power from the modernist point of view, unfortunately, in the Middle East, politics means domination, and the governments of this region have emerged on the basis of a project and within the framework of international political equations after the First World War, any The use of violence has negative consequences for peaceful coexistence among these ethnic and identity groups living in the Middle East.
The only way to combat this identity violence is to democratize the relationship between identity and government in the Middle East , which strengthens civil society and promotes international values and legal standards. It includes humanity. In general, it seems that by understanding the three concepts of politics (power), identity and violence in the body of the government’s identity institution, we will better understand why there is ethnic and religious violence and the lack of peaceful coexistence between these small and large identity units and groups in this region. as it mentioned; The pseudo-Westphalian state is the largest identity institution in the Middle East.
Now the problem is that this leviathan/monster unfortunately lacks theoretical and real foundations in the field of identity in the Middle East, and the territorial basis of the state in this area was not divided according to the identity beliefs state was never born naturally. As a result, governments with unrealistic and weak foundations were created, which have always been and are struggling with identity crisis, but these governments used naked power to overcome the identity problem in the next stage violence against ethnic groups. But on the other hand, ethnic and religious groups, as identity units within the macro identity of the government, resort to mutual violence in order to survive the government violence and also to protect their existence, and this has added to the continuation and reproduction of the “cycle of violence”.
Unfortunately, the problem becomes acute when in a region like the Middle East, in the absence of democratic institutions and civil political culture, a zero-sum game prevails, which will only lead to an increase in anarchy and lack of coexistence. Violence, civil wars, sectarian tensions, explosions, sacrilege and religious conflicts in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon are obvious examples of the crisis of non-existence of coexistence among the residents of the Middle East, which unfortunately, since in most cases the governments are co-governments.
They are sectarian, they are just not able to manage the situation properly; Rather, they will add to making the situation more critical. In any case, the rule of ethnic pluralism instead of social pluralism in the conditions that these societies have not successfully gone through the era of nation-building, unfortunately leads.
Loghman Ghanbari, PhD in Political Science
