درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Latin America has witnessed radical transformations for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. The most important features of the transformations revolve around the orientations of India’s policies. The most important of these differences is the abandonment by most of these countries of the centrality of the ideology of hostility to Western imperialism, and the adoption of an approach based on reforming the global system to serve their interests, and a pragmatism supporting multilateralism (as opposed to non-alignment) to confront multidimensional threats, through multilateralism and building coalitions across ideology, in addition to strategic hedging and resistance to joining alliances under the umbrella of the great powers. This new global environment, and the rise of the influence of the major powers in the global south and their efforts to promote their national interests as a strategic priority, created geopolitical, economic and value complexities for India, which produced an approach to its orientations to compete towards the Latin continent.

The relationship between Identity and stability occupies the core of consensus democracy philosophy, as this governance model is designed to ultimately realise stability by addressing societal fragmentation in divided societies. In Iraq, this relationship shapes a complicated trajectory, mainly because the society moved fast from identity politics (transition) to issues politics (post-transition), which turned the consensus democracy itself that succeeded in realising stability in the transition by functioning well in addressing identity-related crises paradoxically into a driver for instability in the post-transition, for its dysfunctionality beyond the identity sphere. This article argues that this dysfunctionality is primarily linked to flaws of Arend Lijphart’s theory of consensus democracy more than problems stemming from the Iraqi context. It reviews and analyses the existing literature on the nexus of identity and stability under consensus democracy, taking Iraq as a case study. As a review article, this research uses the qualitative method; its data are collected from secondary sources. It found that the philosophy of consensus democracy is designed to primarily meet transition demands, which makes rapid societal transformation beyond transition raise bottom-up pressures expressed in new demands that this democracy cannot accommodate, creating a growing gap between the post-transitional social dynamics and the transitional politics, which generates chronic instability. Further research is needed on stabilisation mechanisms in post-transition, as most studies of consensus democracy focus on stability in transition.

This study aims to investigate Saudi Arabia’s quest for regional hegemony, including its objectives, initiatives, and difficulties. In other words, the degree to which Saudi Arabia has been successful in establishing itself as the region’s dominant power. It is crucial to thoroughly explain Saudi Arabia’s psychological and practical justifications for pursuing regional hegemony in this context. To examine the political discourses, reality, narratives, ambitions, and perspectives of Saudi Arabia and compare these with other regional powers in this area, as well as to highlight a number of context-specific constraints on Saudi Arabia’s aspirations for regional hegemony, is the goal of the research. In addition, it intends to investigate how external powers such as the United States, China, Russia, the European Union, and Turkey influence Middle Eastern regional dynamics based on their own vested interests. This analysis demonstrates that Saudi Arabia’s drive for regional hegemony is mostly restrained by external causes. First, despite its preeminent economic power, the country lacks strong military capabilities to provide a security shield for its friends in this region. Second, the sectarian politics and undiversified economy of the region make it unlikely that secondary nations will receive full public goods. Third, low economic integration, the perception of a common regional threat, the absence of a broad free trade arrangement, the superiority of hard power over soft power, and a lack of mutual trust among regional countries are significantly diminishing the acceptance of Saudi Arabia’s hegemonic role in the region. However, Saudi Arabia is deliberately involving regional partners and coalitions in regional growth. The country takes on the main task for reshaping the Middle East’s economy and elevating this region to success. If Saudi Arabia is successful in fostering regional integration, offering a security shield, encouraging trust building, and collaborating with other states in this region to address shared regional threats, it will have a greater chance than the majority of other states in the region to become the regional hegemon.