Identity as a Political Actor: From Nationalism to Religion

The Middle East is perhaps one of the most identity-preoccupied regions in the world, with various dimensions and manifestations, particularly religious or sectarian identities that are often intertwined. The presence and impact of identity vary among groups, influenced by differing circumstances, contexts, lived experiences, and socio-economic and political conditions. It is more accurate to discuss identity politics, identity perceptions, and the stakes and actors involved, rather than referring to a singular, complete, fixed, or definitively formed identity.

The question of identity in the region is propelled by numerous internal and external factors. However, the relative weight of internal factors has increased due to the ongoing conflict, social fragmentation, and failures of the region’s proclaimed ideals—such as development, freedom, democracy, and participation.

In reality, what is occurring is the opposite of what mentioned above: the region is spiraling into corruption, authoritarianism, dictatorship, poverty, violence, extremism, and sectarianism. Transnational projects like “national unity,” “Islamic unity,” the notion of a “regional base,” and “centralized state” have all faltered. Numerous conflicts and wars have erupted among the countries in the region under the banners of nationalism, religion, and relations with the West, while internal or civil wars persist as a semi-permanent condition in some countries and a looming threat in others.

In this context, certain amusing debates arose in today’s standards. Proponents of ideological narratives in countries such as Syria and Iraq fought over the slogans “Unity, Freedom, Socialism,” not only regarding their meanings but also their order. Should the sequence be “Unity, Freedom, Socialism,” as some argued, or “Freedom, Unity, Socialism,” as others contended? While few may remember this now, it was a prominent debate several decades ago.

One dimension of this conflict revolves around the question: Is there a singular Arab identity with diverse manifestations, forms, and relative differences across Arab countries? Or do multiple identities exist within societies and countries generally characterized as Arab? A similar inquiry pertains to the major ideologies or narratives in the region. For example, is there one Islamic identity, or are there national or ethnic identities of an Islamic nature? Are there differing identities within the religious context itself among various sects, religious groups, Sufi orders, and so forth?

For some time, the region experienced a degree of ideological rigidity that discouraged—even condemned—discussions of plurality, whether concerning geographical environments or differences in social structures, formations, and value systems. This rigidity was evident in the rejection of the term “Arab world” in favor of “Arab homeland,” dismissing “national state” in preference for the disparaging terms “country-state” or “fragmented state,” and the outright rejection of terms like “Middle East” and “Middle East regional system,” even when discussions involved non-Arab states or actors, such as Turkey, Iran, Kurdistan, and Ethiopia.

There have been identity struggles in Turkey and Iran—without strictly delineating “Turks” and “Iranians”—and this could be extended to situations concerning the Kurds, Armenians, etc. The issue of identity, and its socio-national or ethnic formation, has unfolded amid fractures, ruptures, and tensions, some manifesting in ideological and partisan struggles. Divisions have emerged regarding the very nature of society and state, as well as grand national and imaginary landscapes—not merely disagreements over cultural or political programs. Military coups, tensions, and acute socio-political crises have occurred in places like Iran and Turkey (see, for example, Aqil Mahfouz, Dialectics of Society and State in Turkey, 2018, and Dariush Shayegan, The Wounded Consciousness: Iran’s Cultural Identity, 1992). A similar dynamic has occurred among the Kurds, without a Kurdish state, facing Turkish, Persian, and Arab states, making the Kurdish question more complex (Mahfouz, KurdNameh, 2018).

Identity is present in most interactions and tensions in the region, whether overtly or covertly. This positioning gives it a relatively prominent role in the social and political dynamics of the region and the world.

One can discuss lines of thought or expressions of identity, or identity politics and tensions as: A reference point for defining the boundaries and maps of civilizations and as a fault line and source of conflict within the global system (Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations, 1996). Some extend this notion to dynamics within civilizations themselves and within societies and countries, viewing it as a catalyst for deadly alignments and entrenchment (Amin Maalouf, In the Name of Identity: Violence and the Need to Belong, 2000).

Identity also serves as a stronghold for self-preservation, meaning-making, and power assertion against liberalism, globalization, and the postmodern world (see, for example, Alexander Dugin, The Fourth Political Theory, 2012). In this context, identity and ideology intertwine, seeking to create consensus or alliances among identities and major cultural groups that are similar to each other in opposition to the West and the post-liberal world (Immanuel Wallerstein, After Liberalism, 1995).

Furthermore, identity is one of the means by which groups, societies, and nations are structured, shaped, or imagined (Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 2006). Nationalist or communal narratives are often not firmly rooted in objective reality or history. In fact, many foundations of ethnic, national, and religious narratives rest on intentional, imagined, or assumed claims and fantasies. Identity represents one of the responses employed by groups and nations facing what they perceive as an increasing existential threat. A form of mimetic competition arises over the origins, determinants, and sources of identity, leading to disputes over the ownership of these “roots” and the right to call upon, invest in, and utilize them to assert the “self” or undermine the “other.”

Consequently, identity can be viewed as an “interpretive concept” or “analytical framework” for understanding many current phenomena, though it is not final or exclusive. Identity is a multifaceted construct encompassing various dimensions, including identity politics, perceptions, trends, representations, and dynamism. These are shaped by a myriad of preconditions influencing identity’s development and expression.

Moreover, identity is not an isolated construct but part of a broader socio-cultural and political fabric. Its formation and expression are influenced by various internal and external factors, including historical, social, economic, and political developments, shaping its contours and unearthing diverse—and sometimes conflicting—identity dimensions.

Concerning the regional and international environment, some powers exhibit a deliberate will to undermine national constructions perceived as threats (Aziz al-Azmeh, Identity, p. 16). For instance, consider what occurred in Iraq, where ethnic alliances formed and identities strengthened as political actors, resulting in competing perspectives on identity. These perspectives include notions of identity “below the state” and a more expansive view that transcends state boundaries.

It is pivotal to note that the undermining of national construction in Iraq was not merely an external action but rather an outcome of internal agreements and of course regional dynamics, contributing to the complex web of identity politics and conflicts in the region. This phenomenon extends beyond Iraq, echoing similar patterns in countries characterized by diverse identities, like Lebanon, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, and Iraq.

Identities and ideologies rooted in or invoking identity can attain the status of dogmas and certainties, thus becoming a powerful—if not overwhelming—force for mobilization. They can also turn into a destructive force for both the “other” and the “self” when the identity actor feels compelled to act, make an impact, and send a message. In this state, the individual committed to a particular identity might be prepared to be not just a political actor but also a warrior and a killer, wielding not only weapons but also his own death as a tool (see Jean Baudrillard, The Spirit of Terrorism, 2002). All of this unfolds with the accompanying spectacle necessary to achieve the intended objectives of death, killing, or destruction.

The discourse of identity, particularly in the forms of nationalist ideology we are familiar with, appears to have exhausted its capacity for social polarization and political action. Religious frameworks have emerged that have, for various reasons, been able to mobilize widespread social support, largely overcoming the conflict with nationalists and secularists. These have attracted substantial social actors and segments, achieving significant presence in regional politics, even if subjected later to declines and major setbacks. In reality, religious identity movements, or those leveraging religion in politics, have failed to prove they are the “right answer” to the challenges faced by societies in the region today. Instead, they have become a “bleeding wound” in several societies and countries, with their destructive and deadly impacts extending across many nations in the region and worldwide.

In conclusion, identity is a significant “political actor” in the region and serves as a crucial “explanatory framework” for understanding various meanings, alignments, and fault lines of polarization and conflict across groups, societies, and nations, as well as within the global system—all of which are deeply entwined. Identity manifests as both a political agent and the subject of social, cultural, religious, and economic actions. Invariably, there are those who recognize the advantage of exploiting the appeal of identity, viewing it as highly sensitive and readily manipulable in the stakes and tensions of meaning and power.