تأملی جامعه‌شناختی در مقایسۀ نظام‌‌‌های سیاسی لبنان و عراق از منظر دموکراسی توافقی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران جنوب، تهران، ایران

2 دانش‌آموخته جامعه‌شناسی سیاسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران

چکیده

دموکراسی توافقی بیش از نیم قرن در لبنان و نزدیک به دو دهه در عراق اجرایی شده است. با توجه به نارسایی‌های مربوط به فرایند دولت‌ملت‌سازی، این پرسش مطرح است که روند تاریخی‌اجتماعی شکل‌گیری نظام‌‌‌های سیاسی لبنان و عراق بر مبنای الگوی دموکراسی توافقی چگونه است و در این روند، این دو نظام چه شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌هایی داشته‌اند؟ در پاسخ این فرضیه مطرح می‌شود که دموکراسی توافقی گزینه‌ای است از نظر نهادی‌سیاسی با ایجاد بستر مناسب برای مشارکت گروه‌های متکثر قومی، دینی و زبانی قابلیت تحقق امنیت و ثبات نسبی را دارد، اما بافت قبیله‌ای و گرایش‌های سنتی فرقه‌گرایانۀ این کشورها و تداوم شکاف‌های اجتماعی از جمله چالش‌های مؤثر در شکنندگی این دموکراسی است. در این مقاله با استفاده از رهیافت نهادگرایی و روش مقایسه‌ای در بررسی موضوع، به این نتیجه رسیدیم که با توجه به چندفرهنگی‌بودن این دو کشور و تنوع شکاف‌های اجتماعی در آن‌ها، دموکراسی توافقی گزینۀ به‌نسبت مناسبی برای مشارکت سیاسی گروه‌های گوناگون در تصمیم‌گیری‌های دو کشور است و توانسته در این سال‌ها به‌ویژه در لبنان به شیوۀ شبه پارلمانی و در عراق با تمرکزبخشیدن به پارلمان، ثباتی نسبی، اما شکننده به‌وجود آورد. فرهنگ سنتی و عشیره‌ای حاکم بر این دو کشور، مشکل هویت ملی، موانع فرهنگی ایجاد جامعۀ مدنی و سازمان‌های مردم نهاد و کاستی‌‌‌های درونی، این نوع دموکراسی را در عمل با مشکل مواجه کرده است و به‌شکل ظرفی مدرن، اما با مظروفی سنتی و غیردموکراتیک درآمده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A sociological reflection on the comparison of Lebanese and Iraqi political systems from the perspective of consensual democracy

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Khodayar Mortazavi 1
  • Saeed Shams al-Dini 2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Graduate of Political Sociology, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

One of the best ways to achieve political stability in multicultural societies is by consensus democracy known as the "division of power." In this type of democracy, by using the four principles of the parliamentary coalition, autonomy, veto right, and proportional representation, it is tried to create political stability in the country and facilitate the circulation of elites in decision-making by sharing different strata and groups in power. Iraq and Lebanon are multicultural societies with ethnic, linguistic, religious, and cultural diversity. The Lebanese population consists of three major groups: Shiites, Sunnis, and Maronite Christians, and Iraq includes three major groups: Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds. For more than half a century now, in Lebanon, and for nearly two decades, in Iraq, an agreed-upon consensus democracy has been implemented within the framework of their constitution. The mosaic texture of both and the creation of a relatively heterogeneous and heterogeneous society have led to the manifestation of political power based on this democracy and in the form of the pillars of the political system divided between them. Now, considering the shortcomings of the government process - nation-building and non-institutionalization of civil and participatory political culture and the lack or weakness of the party system and NGOs of the two countries, the question of the article focuses on the application of this democracy based on cultural-social diversity and compare their opportunities and challenges. In response, the hypothesis is formulated that consensus democracy is an option that is institutionally-politically capable of achieving relative security and stability by preparing the necessary platform for the participation of multiple ethnic, religious, and linguistic groups. The tribal context and the traditional sectarian tendencies of these countries and the continuation of social divisions are among the effective challenges in the fragility of this democracy. In this article, using both the institutional approach and the comparative method in examining the subject, this result was obtained.Given the multiculturalism of the two countries and the diversity of social divisions in them, consensus democracy is a good option for the political participation of various groups in the decisions of the two countries and has been able to focus on Parliament created relative but fragile stability. The traditional and tribal culture of the two countries, the problem of national identity, cultural barriers to civil society and non-governmental organizations, and the shortcomings of the nation-state-building process have made it difficult to realize the theme of this kind of democracy in practice.It is in the form of a modern dish but with traditional and undemocratic content. In other words, the shape and form of the political system derived from democracy are an agreement commensurate with the multiplicity and cultural diversity in these two countries. However, its content and theme are challenged and conflicted due to the low level of awareness and intellectual maturity of the society and the lack of political pluralism, and it does not have sufficient strength and consistency to create national security and social solidarity.And that is why both the smooth and peaceful transfer of power and the sustainable development and human security in these two countries face serious obstacles and problems, and from time to time we see violent behavior and turmoil or severe political crisis in which national sovereignty and endangers their independence and territorial integrity.The way out of this vulnerable and insecure situation is to train awareness and responsible citizens who have the ability to work together and work in groups and are tolerance and tolerant of opposing ideas, as well as political activism in a peaceful atmosphere away from monotony and self-centeredness. Clarification of economic and political relations, the institutionalization of governing norms and regulations, and the realization of civil institutions and non-governmental organizations are other requirements that can strengthen the foundations of consensus democracy in these countries by eliminating the roots of corruption and discrimination and facilitating citizens' political participation. Non-intervention of foreign powers is another important factor that can provide political independence and national sovereignty, the field of self-confidence of social forces and their interaction in these two countries, and their further role in the dynamics of political and social changes.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Consensus democracy
  • Political system
  • Multicultural societies
  • Tribalism
  • Institutionalism
  • Lebanon
  • Iraq