Identity and Sectarian Belonging in the Middle East

Sectarianism has a profound role in shaping the consciousness of wide segments of the Middle East’s population. It increases their propensity for violent behavior, both verbal and physical, and can lead to sectarian discrimination.
Sectarianism is not born of a single factor. Rather, a set of overlapping factors makes it a complex problem. Among the most significant among these factors, according to Dr. Tawfiq Al-Saif, is that “most Islamic countries are in what could be called an identity crisis.” In his article “Why Did the West Succeed While We Failed?,” he argues that this crisis “is not limited to minorities, the majorities are equally in crisis,” with “minorities believing that the majority is denying them their rights, while the majority believing that the minority is betraying them.”
One reason for this crisis, in my view, is that “identity” has lost its dynamism in these societies. It is seen as fixed and final- something must not be altered. In fact, any attempt to develop and adapt it to developments are inevitably resisted!
Another issue is that identity has become part of binary struggles. As a result, people are now forced to choose between their religious, ethnic, national, or cultural identities, turning identity into a socio-cultural struggle, and fragmenting and distorting it.
Human relationships and interests have also been intertwined with identity, which raises a pressing question: Are these relationships shaped by sub-identities, thereby bringing religion, language, tribe, and race to the forefront, rendering them the pillars underpinning the social order? Or will this order transcend such details, building citizenship and showing flexibility?
Unless Islamic societies address the three points mentioned above, the identity crisis Tawfiq Al-Saif speaks of will continue. Addressing it requires genuine, critical, scientific, and candid reassessments of our mainstream cultural, social, and religious discourses. Legal reform is also needed, as the law amounts to a safety valve, and building a modern, inclusive, and non-monolithic identity necessarily demands a legal framework. Meeting these conditions would allow us to develop identities that encompass all citizens, allow them to freely express their diverse narratives, and live in freedom and without conflict or erasure.
Identity is a living being. It ages and grows frail. It is not a rigid finished article that cannot diminish or grow. That is, we need to renew and develop identity, making it flexible, adaptable, and capable of engaging with other identities and learning from them, abandoning our apprehensions or suspicions.
Interactions between communities with different identities build their respect for one another as they build equal and reciprocal relationships. In turn, these relationships remove the majority/minority and superior/inferior binaries, fostering a consciousness rooted in the pursuit of human dignity and inclusive citizenship. In a modern state, people are not ranked according to cultural preferences; everyone is equal, with no group granted privileges denied to others.
Accordingly, identity is not bound by the conflict of traditional binaries. Rather, it is composed of various elements, each of divergent prominence that is contingent on the society and the individual.
Religion, language, ethnicity, culture, history, and geography are interdependent markers of identity, of both individuals and societies. Just as each person has an individual identity, they also have a collective national identity, as well as cultural and political affiliations. These different markers could be seen as a set of overlapping circles. Contrary to what some may believe, this does not lead to an identity crisis; on the contrary, it accumulates experience and knowledge, maturing with time.
Human relationships, in their historical essence- setting periods of violent conflict aside- have largely been founded on coexistence, interaction, mutual recognition of identities, and deepening shared economic interests. Today, a national identity- one that is shaped by the state and its elites through intellectual and practical programs and initiatives, not through coercion, suppression, or the marginalization of smaller identities- should be the framework of our social order and relationships. The state should be seen as the source of legitimacy, whereby its authority stems from the legitimacy of a social contract between citizens and the governing power.
Some might view this outcome as idealistic or unrealistic, especially in the current context. Across the Middle East, many countries are bogged down in severe sectarian and religious conflicts. However, if we are to reduce and confront these chronic tensions, it is essential to correct the epistemological and political distortions that underpin the animosity. There are indeed several examples of Arab and Islamic societies that have begun this process, cultivating identities that are more modern, more inclusive, and more viable.
Ultimately, just laws remain the framework, especially during transitional periods, and this is a period of transition toward citizenship in Arab societies. Citizenship is becoming the cornerstone of our communities rather than any other form of sub-identity.