Enayatollah Yazdani; Mostafa Qasemi
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of the present paper is to examin the features and characteristics of a failed state with emphasis on the failed state in Libya. The paper seeks to answer the following questions: "Under what conditions does a state end in failure? And what are the criteria of a failed state?" With regard ...
Read More
Purpose: The aim of the present paper is to examin the features and characteristics of a failed state with emphasis on the failed state in Libya. The paper seeks to answer the following questions: "Under what conditions does a state end in failure? And what are the criteria of a failed state?" With regard to the situation in Libya after Gaddafi and the Libyan scene involved in multiple matters, the country can be regarded as a failed state. With the beginning of the Islamic awakening in Tunisia, crisis-prone countries such as Libya faced the awakening of the Muslims. In Libya, after 9 months of conflict between Gaddafi forces and the revolutionaries, the anti-government forces finally gained victory in August of 2011. Following the victory of the Libyan revolutionaries, a new stage began in the socio-political life of the country. At first, it seemed that the process of nation-state building in the country would be taken slowly and with slight ups and downs. However, despite such hope and earlier efforts, after the collapse of the Gaddafi government, not only a powerful state did not take the stage in Libya, two governments, two parliaments, two prime ministers and two ministers entered the scence. During these years, Libya has been torn in fighting between two groups, one of which claimed that they are the genuine revolutionary forces and the other claimed that they have been trying to restore the country to the path of revolution. In the true sense of the word, there is still no government in Libya, and the governments established after the revolution in this country have inherited the inefficiency of Gaddafi's failed state, and are now proceeding along the path of state failure. Considering the situation in post-Gaddafi Libya and many other factors, this country could be regarded as a failed state. Libya is now a country with a government so weak that is unable to provide even its own security. Design/Methodology/Approach: This paper is formed and based on the failed states theory, using the destructive method for exploring failed state indexes in order to examine the failed state in Libya in the post-Gaddafi era. Findings: The new achievement of this paper lies within the situation that when there is no ability to perform functions such as security, welfare, civil society, democracy and legitimacy, the government is in a state of bankruptcy and one is faced with a phenomenon known as a failed state. The situation in Libya is an example of such a state. Tribal tendencies, regionalism, weakness of state institutions, and insufficiencies in various areas such as proper military structure, consensus among the elites and the state, democratic culture and civil society, elites, religious scholars and leaders, control over lands, infrastructure for economic, and foreign intervention are all signs of a failed state in the country. Originality/Value: The failed state is a political body that has disintegrated to a point where basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government no longer function properly. Loss of control, instability, inability to provide public services and interact with other states are the main characteristics of a failed state which is the case of Libya.
Hossien Salimi
Abstract
Purpose: Since the time that all social phenomena and political interactions of man formed in the framework of new nation-states and social and cultural identities defined in this new framework, notwithstanding much emphasis on the idea of peace and its value and significance, indeed the bloodiest and ...
Read More
Purpose: Since the time that all social phenomena and political interactions of man formed in the framework of new nation-states and social and cultural identities defined in this new framework, notwithstanding much emphasis on the idea of peace and its value and significance, indeed the bloodiest and the most widespread wars of history takes place in this era and by modern nation-states. This paper seeks to answer this fundamental question that, has violence and conflict been an essential element of modern nation-state? Answering this question is important because if violence and conflict in international politics rooted in nature and foundation of modern nation-state then achieving stability and peace is possible only through changing the function of this institution or replacing it with alternative institutions.Design/Methodology/Approach: Method of this research is explanatory. In order to answering this question in the format of a theoretical research, at first classical definitions of concept of nation-state will be discussed; then historical context and basis of formation of nation-state will be elucidated and in the end the fundamental dimensions of violence and conflict in modern nation-state will be discussed in the thought of five great thinkers in this field (Bodin, Hobbs, Rousseau, Hegel and Weber). This is a theoretical research that both attempts to survey classical theories in the field of studies on state and conflict and also historical studies on international relations. Also this research is based on a normative and critical approach regarding mainstream theories and those which defend status quo.Findings: This research concludes that despite of pervasive known ideas and values about peace in modern era, nation-state as a modern institution of political power contains a kind of organized violence which in its classical form reproduces it. In other words widespread violence in contemporary history of humanity somehow rooted in this modern institution. Monopoly in use of force, military power and exerting organized violence in the context of conceptualization of sovereignty alongside not recognizing an upper authority in international level and rejection of ethical commitments in modern culture of international relations as a general norm, made out breaking violent conflicts in the face of sharp conflicts and disagreements inevitable. Therefore it seems that in the course of global upheavals, establishing peace is possible only through fundamental change in the functions of modern state.Originality/Value: Hitherto peace studies have always paid particular attention to the category of state and sovereignty. But through combining theoretical and historical approaches this research presents a new attitude to this category. Also explicit results of this research is that maintaining present conditions of modern institution of nation-state made realization of peace impossible; therefore conclusions of this research can be a new window in literature of peace studies specially in the context of Iranian peace studies.
