درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

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.

When analyzing the histories of nations, it becomes clear that times of crisis often give rise to various figures who position themselves as problem solvers. Among these, authoritarian leaders are particularly notable. While certain aspects of their childhoods are frequently cited as significant, the geopolitical contexts and global shifts during their rise to power are equally crucial. These leaders typically emerge in countries experiencing similar external pressures, regional conflicts, or transformations in the international balance of power. By examining these shared geopolitical circumstances alongside personal histories, we gain valuable insight into the emergence and appeal of such figures during turbulent periods. This study identifies eight widely recognized cases from 1919 to 2011, including Adolf Hitler, Manuel Noriega, Idi Amin, Muammar Gaddafi, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, and Tojo Hideki. Using a descriptive, analytical, and comparative approach, it seeks to answer the question: how do authoritarian figures exploit geopolitical environments to consolidate and expand their power? The findings suggest that such leaders often use ongoing crises to legitimize their actions, manipulate public sentiment, and push territorial or ideological agendas. To enhance accuracy and pattern recognition, artificial intelligence (AI) techniques were employed in the analysis phase. These tools helped reveal recurring behavioral and geopolitical patterns that may otherwise remain unnoticed. The study emphasizes the importance of identifying these dynamics early to prevent future international crises.

This article employs the theoretical framework of the conflict school to examine the role of economic reforms in consolidating neopatrimonialism in Saudi Arabia. The central hypothesis of the article is that the recent initiatives of Mohammed bin Salman, particularly through the Vision 2030 document, aimed at adapting the Saudi political system to internal and external changes, maintaining stability and continuity of the regime, and centralizing power in his hands, have contributed to the consolidation of neopatrimonialism in the country. While these economic and social reforms ostensibly aim to modernize Saudi Arabia's economy and society, they effectively function as tools to reinforce traditional power structures and solidify the dominance of the Al Saud family, particularly Mohammed bin Salman himself. By analyzing available data and recent political-economic trends in Saudi Arabia, the article addresses the question of how economic reforms have contributed to the consolidation of neopatrimonialism and what implications this has for the country's power structure. The findings reveal that these reforms, while creating superficial changes in the economy and society, act as mechanisms to preserve and strengthen the patrimonial system and perpetuate the dominance of the ruling elite.

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. 

Geostrategic realms refer to large-scale spatial zones on the Earth shaped by the rivalry among major global powers, forming extensive blocs of confrontation. These realms are structured through a combination of political, cultural, economic, social, military, security, commercial, technological, and media-related factors or a subset thereof and are typically led by a dominant actor assuming a guiding role. At the global level, two primary realms can currently be identified: the maritime realm and the continental realm. Transformations within geostrategic realms are infrequent and evolve over the long term, as dominant powers strive to preserve their superiority and stability by leveraging the aforementioned variables. In the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which intensified cohesion among maritime powers, a new geopolitical window has opened for China to strengthen its position within the continental realm. Moreover, the rise of Donald Trump as President of the United States and the resulting transatlantic tensions over the Ukraine war present the potential for reshaping the global geostrategic landscape. This study investigates these emerging fractures and examines the prospects for realignment among global realms and the rise of new strategic actors. It analyzes geostrategic configurations through the lens of prominent geopolitical theories and interprets the shifting dynamics between the maritime and continental realms in the current global context. The research is primarily based on library and documentary sources and follows a descriptive-analytical methodology.