The Nexus of Identity and Stability under Consensus Democracy “The Case of Iraq”

The relationship between Identity and stability occupies the core of consensus democracy philosophy, as this governance model is designed to ultimately realise stability by addressing societal fragmentation in divided societies. In Iraq, this relationship shapes a complicated trajectory, mainly because the society moved fast from identity politics (transition) to issues politics (post-transition), which turned the consensus democracy itself that succeeded in realising stability in the transition by functioning well in addressing identity-related crises paradoxically into a driver for instability in the post-transition, for its dysfunctionality beyond the identity sphere. This article argues that this dysfunctionality is primarily linked to flaws of Arend Lijphart’s theory of consensus democracy more than problems stemming from the Iraqi context. It reviews and analyses the existing literature on the nexus of identity and stability under consensus democracy, taking Iraq as a case study. As a review article, this research uses the qualitative method; its data are collected from secondary sources. It found that the philosophy of consensus democracy is designed to primarily meet transition demands, which makes rapid societal transformation beyond transition raise bottom-up pressures expressed in new demands that this democracy cannot accommodate, creating a growing gap between the post-transitional social dynamics and the transitional politics, which generates chronic instability. Further research is needed on stabilisation mechanisms in post-transition, as most studies of consensus democracy focus on stability in transition.

کلیدواژه ها:

consensus ، Dysfunctionality ، identity ، Stability ، Transition