جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « democratization » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Democratization is a process which is construed as a inevitable way to reach development, to redistribute income among citizens. The hypothesis of research was the relationship between intergroup inequality and democratization.

we tried to address the process of democratization in two contries, Iran and Saudi Arabia, based on deferent statistics and analyses, with a descriptive- analytic appraoch.

first of all, we found the political system type of the two countries was not democracy. In addition, democratic movements had an up and down trend in Iran while was not appeared these movements in Saudi Arabia. Another finding was that, based on diferent statistics and researches, there was an intergroup inequality in Iran.

It can be argued that, based on Acemoglu and Rabinson`s economic theory, democratic movements in Iran is a response to socio-economic inequalities in the scale of society. In comparison, in spite of a monarchic system governing the Saudi Arabia country, and based upon economic growth and welfare, and to some extend distributing fairly wealth among the country`s citizens, there were not democratic and radical movements.

After about four decades since the initial step, the Ankara agreement, the relations between Turkey and the European Union are still in a state of struggling over Turkey's eligibility to join the EU. In recent decades, this relationship has seen many changes, and there is still ambiguity and uncertainty about the end of this relationship. Turkey that has been considered one of the strategic allies of the European Union, is in the process of becoming a member of the EU, and sinusoidal negotiations of the parties have been the dominant framework in bilateral relations. In this regard, the current role of the army in Turkey's policies has been as the most important part of the EU membership process, as the army considers itself to be the protector of the republic and its principles in Turkey that is result of the past years. Because it is completely against the principles of the EU and opposing the interference of the military in politics, this feature has become a complex puzzle in the Turkey-EU bilateral relations. On this basis, in the process of Turkey's membership, the European Union has strongly sought to reform military-civilian relations in Turkey, and civilian control on military organizations. Democratization of military-civilian relations and control of civilians in military institutions has been one of the most important political issues raised in this process. With the coming to power of the Justice and Development Party, AKP, this process has continued at a faster pace in the domestic and foreign spheres.

Non-democratic Politics, brutality of politics, stable presence of military forces in the eco-political life, institutionalization of authoritarianism, detachment of ideological and strategic thoughts, the descriptive function of democracy in the Egyptian political history had turned politics as the exclusive prerogative of political sovereignty and military forces. By discourse of anti-otherness, attempting to monopolize the politics, and considering the democratizing movements as an action vacating the spoiled fervors of collective actions, this kind of governance prevented to transition to democracy. Affecting by the power structure and the behaviors of the main policymakers on the one hand, and the ceaseless cycle of populist authoritarianism, pseudo-democracy, and neo-authoritarianism on the other hand, the failed democratic experience, and fluctuation of transition to democracy in Egypt is regarded as the triumph of the structure against the agency. Thus, the main question of the current paper is to study why the process of transition to democracy was unsuccessful in Egypt? According to the main hypothesis, policymaking and governance in Egypt are based on undemocratic liberalism. In other words, despite rising the pseudo-liberal creeds in different periods, Egypt has never experienced an institutionalized democratic political life. So, by the logic of historical sociology and the theory of transition to democracy, this paper will test the mentioned hypothesis analytically. By showing up the cycle of populist authoritarianism, quasi-authoritarianism, pseudo-democracy, and neo-authoritarianism in Egypt, the findings show that alienation with democratic values, institutionalized authoritarian values, and lack of democratic culture in the political life of Egypt led to the failure of democratization movements.
As the most populous country in the Middle East subsystem and the third most populous country in the Black Continent, Egypt is one of the main candidates for the transition to democracy. Despite the suspension of political development and the geopolitical and geostrategic instability of the region, the desire for democracy and the effort to transition to a democratic political life is a social and sustainable demand in Egypt. From a historical point of view, despite the experience of democracy in Egypt, the lack of political participation of the people caused the fragility and instability of these movements until the 1980s. But with the transition to the third wave of democracy, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the gradual transition of Latin American and Eastern European countries to democracy, pro-democracy actions in Egypt were pursued more seriously. Studying the history of political and social developments in Egypt as a vanguard of the transition to native democracy is a sign of the emergence of an authoritarian structure and society, which seeks to lay the groundwork for the emergence of political pluralism and democracy by constantly trying to marginalize the hierarchical structure of power. In fact, the growth of social demands, political developments, the emergence of technological and cognitive processes, and the rising waves of globalization caused democracy to become one of the main demands of the Egyptian society. But such a demand is not a one-time thing, but has a hundred years of political history.
The first round of the transition to democracy in Egypt began with the country's independence in 1922, which continued until 1949 despite its fragility and instability. Colonialism, as the dominant logic on the African continent, made no country capable of transitioning to democracy. Now, during the constitutional monarchy of King Farouk in the years 1922 to 1949, Egypt was able to experience a quasi-democratic political system for the first time. Egypt experienced the second period of transition to democracy during the rule of Anwar Sadat. The emergence of various political forces, the support of Islamist organizations and forces, and the application of open-door liberal policies were considered as signs of Egypt's desire for democracy, which leads it to political development and social reforms. But the third period of the transition to democracy in Egypt can be seen as the result of the political and social developments of 2011, when the revolutionaries were trying to establish a new political plan for governance and politics. It is worth noting that neglecting the differences between different periods of transition to democracy in Egypt is a kind of cognitive reductionism.
One of the main differences between the third transition period and the previous two periods is the type of democratic and reformist social actors. In the sense that the main reformists and democrats in the first and second period were the political rulers and the main actors in the national power scene, while the main pro-democracy activists in the third period were the society and the people. Democracy and political reformism in the first and second periods were hierarchical and from top to bottom, in the third period it came from the bottom to the top. Unlike the first and second periods, democratization and reformism in the third period were derived from the cognitive equipping of society and the emergence of the third wave of knowledge due to the existence of social networks. Democracy in the first and second period did not necessarily change the structure of political power, while the rotation of political actors and the relative change in the ruling attitudes towards the society have been the reasons for the third period of transition. Despite these differences, fragility and instability are common features of different transition periods in Egypt. In such a way that after a short period of time, the movement for democracy and reformism was stopped. In this article, we want to pathologically examine the pro-democracy movements in Egypt from 1950 to 2020. This question is raised, why the transition to democracy in Egypt has failed? In response to this hypothesis, politics and governance in Egypt is based on undemocratic liberalism; In this way, despite the emergence of pseudo-liberal teachings in different periods, democratic political life was never institutionalized in Egypt. According to the hypothesis of the research, institutional cultural and traditional habits, unfamiliarity with democratic teachings and the institutionalization of authoritarian norms in Egypt caused closeness with some pseudo-liberal behaviors. These conditions, along with the lack of democratic biopolitical institutions, failed the transition to democracy.
In a summary, it should be said that the political and social developments in Egypt during the post-Mubarak era, especially after the inauguration of Muhammad Morsi, with the relative increase in the level of economic activity and the creation of a platform for the emergence of various political and social parties and forces, promised democracy in the new era. But the lack of strategic vision between the revolutionary coalition forces, the lack of serious commitment of the Islamist, liberal, secular and leftist forces to democratic teachings, seeking power as the main logic of the Islamists in the 2012 elections and tactical alliance with the military to win the election, increasing the political and economic privileges of the military by The ruling Islamists after the election victory, the cooperation of liberal and secular forces with the military in 2013 in criticizing the Islamists, the inability of the ruling political forces to connect strategic thoughts and ideological stances, the distance from democratic teachings and cultural habits ruling Egypt and the cooperation of transnational forces to support The presence of the military in the political and economic life of Egypt caused the transition to democracy to face many challenges in the current era. In other words, Egypt's failure to transition to democracy and the continuation of the cycle of authoritarianism and quasi-democracy is a strategy to control power and stabilize the political position of those in power.

The transition to democracy or even the beginning of the democratization process is affected by various factors that researchers have pointed out based on their theoretical tendencies: modernization, economic situation, external pressure, integration of trust networks in public policy, trust in the government. Institutions have been introduced as effective factors in the transition. Political culture, which is generally based on the link between politics, culture, and especially the influence of culture, beliefs and values in the cultural structure of political societies, is included in this matter. The participation of citizens in political issues and government affairs is very important in the establishment of the system and it requires the active participation of people in their destiny and their society with rational judgment for intervention and be effective in making decisions to achieve national goals and at the same time in determining public policies and how to govern the country. In the last hundred years, Afghanistan has gone through many periods to achieve the rule of law, the right to vote, the enjoyment of civil rights and liberties and the limitation of the powers of rulers and politicians to enact laws and constitutions.Research Question: This research seeks to answer the question that according to the political and cultural conditions of Afghanistan, what factors have hindered the transition to a democratic and participatory political culture?Research Hypothesis: Due to the structural weaknesses and widespread administrative corruption of Afghanistan's previous political system, democracy has had less opportunity to grow and spread in this country.

In this research, due to the researcher's inability to travel to Afghanistan after the Taliban took control of this country, it was not possible to identify a statistically significant population for the survey. Therefore, interviews were conducted with selected individuals by asking a series of questions. The interview consisted of 17 questions and a personal information table. Factors that were important for the interviews included indicators such as gender, religion, ethnicity, literacy level and residence in Afghanistan. Therefore, people were identified who were either living in Afghanistan or recently immigrated from Afghanistan or came to Iran for a trip. After providing necessary infrastructure for conducting the interviews and identifying the selected individuals, the data for this study were collected through semi-structured interviews, the sample size of this study.In this study, through open coding, more than 120 concepts were extracted from meaningful sentences. These concepts were combined in 22 subcategories and 13 main categories and a final core category, "Obstacles to Participatory and Democratic Political Culture in Afghanistan," was extracted from all the main categories.

In this research, the central and fundamental issue that always emerges from the data and to which all other main issues are related is "obstacles to a participatory and democratic political culture in Afghanistan". The central phenomenon of this study explains what obstacles prevent the establishment of a democratic and participatory political culture in Afghanistan. Additionally, because the central phenomenon is constructed from key concepts such as "inefficiency of the national government in the context of historical developments", "weakness of national and local political institutions", "marginalization and elimination of women and political elites in society", "political passivity and disillusionment of people in the shadow of a rent-seeking and independent government", and "lack of political outlook growth and structural and administrative corruption as barriers to democracy", it is called "obstacles to a participatory and democratic political culture in Afghanistan."

The main concern of this research is to identify the structural and mental obstacles that have prevented the democratization of the political system in Afghanistan for years. According to Huntington's action-oriented approach, which focuses on the analysis of factors preventing the transition to democracy, the structure of the non-democratic political system of Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, with fewer opportunities for political expansion and development within the framework of democracy, can be viewed from the perspective of nationalism. He has analyzed monopolization, administrative corruption and rent-seeking, suppression of political parties and organizations, lack of rule of law, unhealthy and non-transparent elections, and factors of this kind, all of which contribute to the failure to transition to a democratic and participatory political culture in the country. An important point that is constantly visible under the comments of the participants and has been mentioned in the main and sub-categories, is the strong demand of the people to hold safe and transparent elections and of course to emphasize the constructive and effective activities of political institutions. Although the level of political participation in Afghanistan is low due to the above-mentioned reasons, the result of this research points to the lack of development of the desired political attitude of democracy in this country, therefore this does not mean that people feel the need for constructive and decisive participation in their political destiny. They don't have it, except that the maximum demand is to hold safe elections with the presence of candidates from various ethnic and religious spectrums, which will be postponed for the time being when the Taliban comes back to power. Successful democratization in Afghanistan depends on the existence of developed socio-economic structures with the condition of the presence of civil society, the positive role of foreign and international factors and the appropriate democratic model among political elites, which increases the possibility of achieving it. Without any of these elements, democratization will not take place.

The purpose of the present study is to review the American demarcation project in the Greater Middle East Initiative (GMEI). The research method is descriptive-analytic and the results showed that the US as the only super power remaining from the cold war era, aimed to become a global hegemonic power by its domination over the strategic region of the Middle East so that the USA in the American order is at the top of the pyramid and other powers are below in a linear line. When the US attacked the region and occupied Iraq, it raised two strategies of the elimination of the weapons of mass destruction and countering terrorism. Yet this hypothesis is proposed that the US main strategy in GMEI was the American democratization project in the region. If the US succeeds in this strategy, the condition of reaching its goals in the GMEI is facilitated.

The essence of politics and political sociology is based on how to regulate the unequal power relations between the rulers and the ruled. This is exactly what justifies the existential necessity of the political order and its continuation or overthrow. Therefore, the institutional construction of the state and its political stability, based on whether it has the necessary political legitimacy or not, plays a prominent role in its continuation or overthrow. In this regard, the current research emphasizes that state-building in the first Pahlavi period was established in conflict with democracy, and as a result, it suffered from a lack of legitimacy and its political stability was fragile; Therefore, in this research, the institutional structure of the government and its relationship with the institutions of democracy are examined as the most important component of legitimizing unequal power relations And it tries to answer the question why the political order did not have the necessary political legitimacy during the first Pahlavi period? The hypothesis of the research is based on the answer that the desire of the government in the first Pahlavi period towards illegitimate power through the conflict between personal and impersonal interests came into conflict with political institutionalism, and as a result, the regime was incapable of reproducing political legitimacy and the political order was deteriorating. The lack of legitimacy was faced. The data has been collected through the library-document method and data analysis has been done using Thomas Nigel's "Conflict of Interests and Values Theory".

The Islamic Awakening and the beginning of the popular uprising that led to the overthrow of Mubarak marked the beginning of a new phase in Egyptian politics, which was expected to see the tyranny and dictatorship removed from the country forever and replaced by a democratic government based on a new political order. As president, the process of democratization continued, but in a short time, General al-Sisi arrested Morsi in a creeping coup and continued to seize power personally. What is the main question in this article is that; What have been the consequences of the uprising of the Egyptian people in 2011 so far? And which forces have influenced the process of democratization of the Egyptian people? The results of the investigation show that the pro-democracy uprising of the Egyptian people has failed with the intervention of the army and the removal of Mohamed Morsi from the presidency. The most important influential forces in the process of democratization of Egypt are: the army, the Muslim Brotherhood, secular nationalist parties and groups. The research method is qualitative, documentary and library, with the help of filing tools from Persian and English books and articles.

Basically, the issue of democratization and consolidation of democracy has been the main concern of humanity, especially intellectuals and philosophers throughout history; because, firstly, democracy is the most effective system for achieving balance and only order involves the least evil, and secondly, in the words of Alfred Smith, all the failures of democracy can be cured with more democracy. However, the rate and percentage of failures and defects are not the same in all countries; For this reason, it is necessary to analyze the systems that have fulfilled all the conditions of democracy to a great extent, the systems that have fulfilled some of the conditions of democracy and the systems that sometimes even have the minimum conditions of democracy. Systems with the first feature are usually democratized, systems with the second feature are hybrid, and systems with the third feature are undemocratic. Each of these governance methods has a direct or indirect relationship with the process of democratization and the consolidation of democracy. In principle, the main problem and question in this research are to explain the relationship between "governmental method" and "the process of democratization and consolidation of democracy" (problem and question). Achieving this goal is pursued with the help of "descriptive-analytical" methods and using the library and digital resources (method). It seems that among the various models of democracy, "minimal democracy" is more closely related to the governing periods of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and "maximum democracy" has the most positive impact on the "process of democratization and consolidation”. (Findings)

In democratization approach, the root of war and insecurity in the international system is the lack of democracy. Therefore, democratization of the governments has changed to an important procedure in the cold postwar world. This important issue is in progress sometimes in the form of process, and sometimes in the form of project, by the international organizations that have legitimation and universal acceptance. The objective of this research is to analyze the role of the international organizations on democratization of the governments that are in non-democratic status. Hence, by focusing on the role of the UN as one of the most effective public international organizations, this question is raised that what is the role of the international organizations, especially UN, in democratization of the governments? Hypothesis of the research, which is conducted in descriptive- analytical method, is that “the UN plays an active role through its major institutions such as Security Council, general meeting and secretary-general by implementing and executing the legal and political (or diplomatic) actions and institutionalizing for accelerating anti-authoritarianism and fixing democracy in the non-democratic countries”. Findings of the paper show that the high levels of independence and legitimation of the international organizations such as UN have made the democratization of the non-democratic governments possible. The case of Afghanistan will be reviewed for clarifying this interaction.

According to Huntington, quantitative growth and qualitative change of a new middle class lead to the development of civil institutions and the decline of authoritarian symbols, and majority for political changes are supported. The question is that why the process of political changes has not been materialized in spite of this class increase in Saudi Arabia and Iraq? Based on the theory of transition to democracy and the comparative method, findings show that both countries are similar in increasing symbolic features of emerged middle classes, such as the development of higher education, bureaucracy and per capita income. However, due to cultural barriers, the rentier nature of the government, the patronage relationship, and the negative role of the external factor, any role in advancing democratization is excluded from this class, and tactical liberalization from above may lead to revolutionary change if democratic demands are not met, and may cause a general uprising. Political instability and structures imposed by American after the collapse of the Baathist regime are also responsible for dysfunction of this classes in Iraq in the establishment of democracy while Iraq has passed the first process of democratization by the collapse regime of Saddam and entered the second phase of democratic institutional consolidation, yet Saudi Arabia has faced serious barriers in her first phase.

The issue of democratization and consolidation of democracy has been the main concern of humanity. Democracy is the most effective system for achieving balance, and order involves the least evil. The rate of failures and defects are not the same in all countries; some have fulfilled all the conditions of democracy to a great extent, some have fulfilled some of the conditions of democracy and some that even have the minimum conditions of democracy. Systems with the first feature are usually democratized, second ones are hybrid, and third ones are undemocratic. Each of these governance methods has a direct or indirect relationship with the process of democratization and the consolidation of democracy. In principle, the main problem and question in this research is to explain the relationship between "governance method" and "the process of democratization and consolidation of democracy".Among the various models of democracy, "maximum democracy" seems to have the most positive impact on the "process of democratization and consolidation" and is closer to the ideal model of democratic order; The next level belongs to minimal and hybrid democracies.

The process of democratization of Turkey over more than a century has been accompanied by various barriers, such as military intervention, inefficient and passive opposition, undemocratic performance and sponsor of the religious-political tariqa, ethnic and religious rifts, authoritarian government leaders, political parties’ poor and sometimes biased performance, contradictory international policies [political pressures, ideological considerations of the European :::union::: and the United States], the spirit of the time [the power of extreme political systems and the supporter of dictatorship in the international system], the proliferation effects of the region, each of which contributes to delaying in the "consolidation of democracy". The result of the present study is that although the barriers still remain influential in the era of the AKP [2002 </span>-present], their impact has declined substantially; thus, the new multilayer barrier , under the title "The ambiguous and multi-faceted political nature-a structured party structure-the authoritarian leadership of the leadership". This new barrier has created its special container / templates under the titles of "Delegative Democracy" and "Semi-authority", which have their own barriers to consolidating democracy. In this research, it has been attempted to analyze the barriers to the consolidation of democracy during the mentioned period, based on the descriptive-analytical methodology and library and documentary sources.

When India came to democracy it was considered to be essentially a backward and traditional society. The post-independence conditions of India and the process of its political development shows that the assumptions of the modernization school of thought are neither useful nor correct for describing the development process in India, Although the growth of democracy in countries such as South Korea can confirm the views of political modernization. Based on objective facts, democracy in India was instrumental in creating modernization and structural changes in various political, social and cultural arenas. According to Democratization theorists, democracy is more than the title of a particular state, as proposed by the theorists of the modernization thinkers, a dynamic and continuous process that leads to the operationalization of the concept of the universal participation. The beneficial economic, cultural and social institutions are the fruits of democratic political institutions that externally prioritize other institutions. In present study, our fundamental concern is to understand the reason of sustainability of democracy in India and the lessons which it might have for Iran. The research hypothesis is based on the belief that the particular process of democratization in India is the reason of this durability. The study is attempting by describing the processes of democracy at the speculative level as well as the real life, demonstrate the reasonableness of the hypothesis of research and the lessons that it may have for the political development in Iran.

Most research has been conducted on the American strategy in Relation to transition to democracy in West Asia Stressed that the country was in strategic Dilemma. In the sense the Obama administration has sought to democratize and protect human rights and, on the other hand, it has been afraid of losing its strategic interests in the region. Such considerations have led to incongruous actions by the country. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to test the validity of these two hypotheses. So, the question arises what is US strategy in both Syria and Bahrain towards the democratization process? Following the events Syria and Bahrain after 2011, the hypothesis is that the US foreign policy is specified which we call it strategic balance. We believe maintaining a strategic balance by preventing the collapse of the balance of regional forces has been a top priority for US foreign policy. Democratization and protection of human rights From the United States are being applied in line with the strategic balance policy.

After the fall of Saddam, active participation of the Shiites and Kurds along with the minimal and passive participation of the Sunnis led to the formation of a new structure based on democratic principles. At a time when it was thought that Iraq will find peace by eliminating one of the biggest dictators of history, the country experienced political and security crises emerging one after another. It disrupted democratic process of state-building and dragged Iraqi government into the abyss of despair. Using exploratory method, library tools and interviews, the paper is to answer the question "what are the obstacles to the process of state-building in Iraq?" In order to answer the question, it was hypothesized that “social gaps activated by ethno-sectarian distribution of the population in Iraq and the lack of infrastructure required for democratization, as well as the tribal and nomadic structure of the country, obstructed state-building process in Iraq”. Besides confirming the hypothesis, the results showed that consensus democracy as a dominated pattern of political system, not only exacerbated social gaps but also led to the ineffectiveness of the political system of Iraq and it is one of the barriers to state-building in the country.

Egypt as one of the most important Arab countries in the Middle East and world play a significant role in regional and international interactions. Internal developments in Egypt and the overthrow of the Mubarak regime, Marks the beginning of new stage in the political life which make a lot of transformation for the domestic and international political structure. This paper seeks to study this issue that, what is the main regional and global obstacle in front of Egypt’s drive to democratization. The aim of this research is to determine the obstacles and problems on the way to democratization in international environment. The main question is that, which factors in International level did prevent the democratization in Egypt? The main hypothesis in this paper is that, the democratization of Egept has been prevented because of geopolitical role of Egypt in the Middle East, its high position in Arab world as well as close alliance with USA and Zionist regime.