Introduction: 

Iraq's story is told through its landmarks and the diverse mix of its people. This diversity, which could be a source of wealth, has also been a point of conflict shaping Iraq's politics and the entire Middle East. The complex link between identity and political systems in this area offers an interesting case study on how rooted cultural ties affect governance policymaking and resolving conflicts.  

This article delves into the role played by identity in shaping political systems in the Middle East, focusing particularly on Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon as a lens to understand broader regional dynamics. By merging theories on nationalism, ethnic strife, and federalism, this article aims to uncover the interaction between identity and political authority. Through an examination of cases in the Middle East region, this article will shed light on how ethnic identities—often manipulated or sidelined—affect government policies and strategies for resolving conflicts that ultimately shape the political landscape. At the core of this article lies the argument that ethnic identity significantly impacts structures, government policies, and efforts to resolve conflicts in the Middle East.

The influence can be seen in the tensions, the formation of political alliances, and the development of state policies that aim to manage or leverage ethnic diversity. With its makeup and intricate political past, Iraq is a crucial case study for exploring these dynamics. It provides insights relevant to Iraq and applicable to the Middle Eastern region.

Historical Context and theories:

The Middle East is known for its mix of cultures, languages, and religions, which are deeply intertwined with a history and ethnic variety. This diversity is not random. As a result, civilizations, trade routes, and colonial borders were drawn without much consideration for the actual ethnic and religious makeup on the ground. One such example is the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, where France and Britain divided Ottoman Empire territories in the Middle East without regard for the people living there. This arbitrary division has fueled conflicts and divisions among ethnic groups in the region.

After gaining independence from powers, the formation of nation-states did not necessarily ease these tensions; instead, it often worsened them as these new states attempted to create national identities, sometimes at the expense of ethnic diversity. In Iraq, efforts to establish an identity rooted in Arab nationalism sidelined non-Arab groups, like Kurds and Turkmen, leading to prolonged periods of conflict and instability. 

Anderson (1983) introduced the concept of nations as "imagined communities," where a nation is a social construct envisioned by its people. This framework helps understand the dual role of nationalism in the Middle East—as a force for unity and division (Anderson, 1983). Kaufman's (1996) "symbolic politics" theory posits that ethnic conflict is driven by leaders who exploit symbols and historical narratives to mobilize ethnic groups, often leading to violence. This theory applies to the Middle East, where ethnic narratives fuel conflicts, such as the Kurdish struggle (Kaufman, 1996).   

Interplay between Ethnic Identity and Political Power: 

The impact of identity on developments, government policies, and peace efforts in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon is a nuanced and multifaceted topic that has garnered scholarly interest. Iraq and Syria Hadar (2024) delves into how identities and Shiite communities significantly shape the regional political landscape. The research emphasizes how Iran's backing of groups in Syria and Iraq, along with its support for rebels in Yemen, highlights the significant influence of ethnic associations on political alliances and conflict dynamics. This assistance deepens divides and influences government policies and approaches to resolving conflicts within these nations, demonstrating the intricate links between ethnic identity and political power structures in the area (Hadar, 2024).

Moreover, the manipulation and utilization of identities by nongovernmental entities underscore the complex relationship between ethnicity and political tactics. In Lebanon, for example, the intricate interplay among sectarian groups within the nation's political framework illustrates how ethnic identities can be utilized to navigate power dynamics and impact government policies. 

Lebanon's political system, structured around groups to distribute power evenly, offers a fascinating example of how ethnic and religious identities impact politics and conflict resolution. While the system aims to prevent one group from dominating, it sometimes worsens divides. It adds complexity to governance, showing the difficulties of handling diversity within political structures meant to include it (Hadar, 2024).

The interplay between ethnic identity and political power in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon reveals nuanced interactions that significantly influence political structures, state policies, and conflict resolution processes. One prominent pattern observed across these case studies is the pivotal role of ethnic and sectarian identities in forming political alliances and shaping state strategies. In Iraq and Syria, the support for specific ethnic groups by regional powers, as discussed by Hadar (2024), not only fortifies sectarian divisions but also directs the course of conflict and negotiation strategies within these states. This dynamic illustrates how ethnic identities can be both a source of power and a point of contention, affecting governance, state-building efforts, and the stability of political entities.

In Lebanon, the political system's design to distribute power among ethnic and sectarian groups highlights an attempt to manage ethnic diversity through political structures. This system, however, also underscores an anomaly where the institutionalization of ethnic divisions can lead to entrenched sectarianism, affecting the efficacy of governance and the potential for conflict. The Lebanese case demonstrates the double-edged sword of accommodating ethnic diversity within political systems, where efforts to prevent domination by any single group can inadvertently solidify divisions, impacting the state's cohesion and functioning.

The findings from this analysis both support and challenge existing theories on nationalism, ethnic conflict, and federalism. On the one hand, they affirm theories suggesting that ethnic identities can be mobilized to gain political power and that such mobilization can lead to conflict (Horowitz, 1985). The support for ethnic groups as political actors, as seen in Iraq and Syria, exemplifies this, showcasing how ethnic identities are central to the formation of political alliances and conflicts. On the other hand, the cases challenge theories that view federalism or power-sharing as straightforward solutions to ethnic conflict (Lijphart, 1977). While designed to manage diversity, the Lebanese political system illustrates the complexities and unintended consequences of institutionalizing ethnic divisions, suggesting that applying federalism or consociationalism requires nuanced understanding and adaptation to specific contexts.

These observations expand the discourse on nationalism, ethnic conflict, and federalism by emphasizing the importance of context in understanding the relationship between ethnic identity and political power. They suggest that while ethnic identities can significantly influence political dynamics, the outcomes of such influence are contingent on the interplay between historical legacies, state policies, and the strategic interests of internal and external actors. This complexity highlights the need for more refined theories that account for the dynamic and multifaceted nature of ethnic identity's role in political systems.

Key Findings:

This analysis has delved into the intricate ways in which ethnic identity interacts with political power within the contexts of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. A key finding is that ethnic and sectarian identities are pivotal in shaping political alliances, state policies, and conflict dynamics. As discussed by Hadar (2024), the evidence shows that the support of certain ethnic groups by regional and international powers can strengthen sectarian divisions and influence the trajectory of conflicts and negotiations. The case of Lebanon illustrates the complexities of managing ethnic diversity within political systems designed to prevent the domination of any single group. While aimed at inclusivity, this system can exacerbate divisions and impact governance effectiveness. These findings support theories that highlight the mobilization of ethnic identities in political power struggles and challenge the notions that federalism or power-sharing arrangements are panaceas for ethnic conflict.

Implications for Policy and Practice: 

The research underscores the need for policy-making and conflict-resolution strategies in the Middle East to consider the nuanced roles of ethnic identities. Policies should address underlying grievances that fuel ethnic divisions and conflicts rather than merely institutionalizing these divisions through political arrangements. In Iraq and Syria, international efforts should focus on supporting inclusive governance that transcends sectarian lines, promoting national identities over sectarian ones. In Lebanon, policy reforms might aim to gradually shift from a sectarian political system to one based on citizenship and competence, reducing the politicization of ethnic identities. Additionally, regional policies should discourage external powers from exploiting ethnic divisions for geopolitical gains, promoting regional cooperation and dialogue.

References: 

Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.

Kaufman, S. J. (1996). Symbolic Politics or Rational Choice? Testing Theories of Extreme Ethnic Violence. International Security, 20(4), 5-45.

Hadar, L. (2024). Playing Chess with Iran: Deterrence Without Provocation. Retrieved from Policy Commons.

Horowitz, D. L. (1985). Ethnic Groups in Conflict. University of California Press.

Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. Yale University Press.