نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
1 گروه علوم سیاسی- دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی- دانشگاه بیرجند- بیرجند- خراسان جنوبی- ایران
2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران
3 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه مطالعات منطقه ای، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی- دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی
عنوان مقاله [English]
The process of nation-building is a Western process that has been favorably used by modern European countries. This process is based on the creation of a strong government institution, the formation of an orderly and efficient bureaucracy, as well as the definition of national identity for the citizens present at certain borders, under the title of nation. Imposed borders in the Middle East, lack of nation-building grounds such as democracy in the Middle East, late accession of countries in the region, as well as ethnic and racial dispersion of people in the region, cause tensions within and between countries. In Lebanon, as one of the unsuccessful examples in the field of state-nation-building, the multiplicity of ethnic and religious groups and the constant existence of security tensions have marked an endless cycle of crisis in the body of power as well as in society. In the present article, an attempt is made to review the theories of nation-building government to answer the question why the nation-building government has not been successful in the Middle East, especially in Lebanon? The premise of the research is that the model used for nation-building in the Middle East, instead of solving the problem, has created new crises such as the crisis of identity and the crisis of legitimacy. In the case of Lebanon, we try to explain the failure of the nation-building process in this country by examining components such as the structure of government, limited democracy, and ethnic and sectarian divisions
As we have seen, nation-building has become more of a challenge to the elites of the region than a means of resolving the crises in the Middle East. The effects of colonialism in the Middle East are still visible today, years later, and the imposed demarcations caused the present nation to see differences and contradictions among themselves rather than in unity and solidarity. This has led to tensions between them. The imposition of the European model of nation-building, regardless of the lack of necessary infrastructure in the Middle East, not only failed, but also exacerbated existing crises and perpetuated weak states. According to Weber's definition of government, this institution does not have the ability to monopolize the legitimate use of force. Inefficient bureaucracy in the Middle East only leads to delays in getting things done. Lack of understanding between members in the body of power leads to a crisis, a crisis that should not be referred to as multi-state but as stateless, because all the efforts of political elites will be spent on resolving tensions in government and the capacity to address crises in society. And the International will not remain. In the Middle East, citizens at defined geographical borders cannot define their identity, an identity that can encompass all individuals of the country and be different from the national identities of neighboring countries.
Such a situation is well seen in Lebanon, where the citizens of this country are not only not connected to each other, but they have also lost touch with the government. In a country where democracy is claimed, people are critical of all statesmen and call for their resignation in constant demonstrations and protests. The Lebanese tribal system is not the desired system of the Lebanese people, it is a model imposed by France, the inefficiency of which has been proven many times. Numerous security incidents in this country have worn out the government. This has led to the lack of any cultural and educational infrastructure that can instill and build a clear and comprehensive national identity. The government faces many challenges within itself, and if it has the capacity to do so, it will simply neutralize or minimize the consequences of tensions at the highest levels of security and the military. The constant interference of foreign countries has also contributed to the gradual erosion of Lebanon, and it is natural for a lack of consensus, whether among political elites or members of the nation and social groups, despite the constant presence of foreign countries with diverse and sometimes conflicting interests.