IntroductionIranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties have been a source of insecurity in western Iran, undergoing significant changes in their movement over time. Following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, they exploited the vacuum in central power and the nascent revolution, creating instability and insecurity in Iran’s territories against the central government and people residing in Kurdish regions. Later, as the central government established itself and brought peace and order to the country, these parties sought refuge in Iraq under Saddam Hussein’s regime, which was then at war with Iran. After Saddam’s fall, they fled to northern Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan, citing a shared Kurdish identity as the reason. Understanding the roots of their presence in northern Iraq and their impact on Iraqi Kurdistan requires examination of the current power structure in Iraq and sociological analysis of its ethnic and religious dynamics, especially during the democratization process in the post-Saddam era.The overthrow of Saddam Hussein had a profound impact on Iraq’s political structure, resulting in consociational  democracy as the replacement. Consociational   democracy, as an alternative for majoritarian democracy, relies on the cooperation and agreement of the power elite and parties involved in heterogeneous societies. Given Iraq’s unique cultural, social, and historical factors, it was not feasible for majoritarian democracy to ensure public participation and protect minority rights. Even consociational democracy has its own consequences and effects. In Iraq, consociational democracy led to changes in the power dynamics and positions of the Iraqi Kurds. These changes had implications beyond Iraq, affecting the Kurds of other countries—including Iranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties—given their shared identity and common historical and cultural background. The main question of the research is, what is the impact of consociational  democracy and the institutionalization of power in Iraqi Kurdistan on Iranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties? Literature ReviewUsing analytical and descriptive methods, Pourahmadi et al. (2016) examined the obstacles facing the democratization process in Iraq. The results revealed multiple factors including ongoing insecurity and political instability, low levels of economic and social development indicators, weak civil political culture, and other factors that exacerbate these crises. Nasri and Rezaei (2018) adopted an analytical–descriptive approach to examine the limitations and possibilities of the Iraqi Kurdistan region in achieving independence. The results concluded that currently, due to structural constraints, geopolitical nature, and resistance from neighboring countries, complete independence for the Iraqi Kurdistan region is not feasible. Relying on the content analysis method, Mohammadi (2008) studied ethnic divisions and their role in ethnic divergence within the country. The results indicated that in regions with higher social divides, there is greater ethnic divergence, while areas with intersecting divides experience lesser divergence.Materials and MethodsThe present research used a qualitative method and a descriptive–analytical model to investigate the impact of consociational democracy and institutionalization of power in Iraqi Kurdistan on Iranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties.The research employed Lijphart’s perspective on consociational democracy as a theoretical framework and applied it to the Iraqi context. The main objective of the study was to offer a thorough analysis of how consociationalism and power institutionalization in Iraq have impacted Iranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties.Lijphart identified four key criteria for consociational democracy: grand coalitions, proportionality, mutual veto rights, and segmental autonomy or federalism. These criteria were incorporated into the government structure of Iraq after 2005. This study analyzed the impact of this democratic process on Iraqi society, including the Kurdish population, and assessed the effects of changes in Iraqi Kurdish society on Iranian Kurdish movements, particularly anti-Revolution movements. To ensure the study’s reliability, the researchers relied on 20 experts, including university professors and specialists in the issues related to Iraq, Iraqi Kurdistan, and the Kurdish anti-Revolution front. Additionally, the results of in-depth questionnaires were used to formulate and compare the findings.ConclusionIn conclusion, the consociational democracy and institutionalization of power in Iraqi Kurdistan have led to a shift in the autonomy strategy and the adoption of federalism among Iranian Kurdish anti-Revolution parties. As a result, their independence and centrifugal tendencies have increased. The discourse of autonomy among these parties has evolved into a discourse of federalism, influenced by Iraqi Kurdish politics. This shift does not diminish the significance or meaning of the process, but rather opens up a more nuanced discussion of separatism, including the right to self-determination and a Kurdish independence referendum within a federal framework. Federalism is a more appealing and populist concept for the anti-Revolution parties. These armed groups have continued to provide military and urban warfare training to the Peshmerga forces in the Kurdistan region and occasionally engage in guerrilla attacks on Iran’s borders. Since the fall of Saddam’s regime, Iraqi Kurdistan has become a base of support for Kurdish anti-Revolution forces, enabling them to create pursue instability in western Iran and pursue their separatist agenda through both soft and hard tactics.Due to the strong sense of Kurdish identity, the Kurdish society and the Kurdish anti-Revolution are inevitably influenced by Iraqi Kurdistan. This issue should be addressed in order to control the peace and security of the borders. In this line, it is suggested that the costs of hosting the Kurdish anti-Revolution in the Iraqi Kurdistan region be increased for both the regional government and the central government of Iraq. This can be achieved by relying on soft power, diplomatic efforts, and negations with the Kurdish and Iraqi authorities, or if necessary, by resorting to military power.

Stability and dispute in heterogeneous societies with diverse racial, linguistic, religious, and ethnic factors are among the topics of interest to researchers and social scientists. They try to understand how rival social groups can communicate without conflict, chaos, or collapse while avoiding violence and oppression and achieving stability through “bargaining and compromise” (since otherwise, the institutionalization of sectarian identities may result in conflict over leadership and power among various groups). Like other Middle Eastern nations, Iraq has a mosaic-like social structure. This country’s diverse population includes ethnic and religious diversity, resulting in ethnoreligious structural gaps. In addition to the three major groups-, namely Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites- minority groups of Iraq include Mandaeans, Jews, Christians, and Yazidis. Iraq also hosts Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Turkmens as ethnic groups. This country is divided into eighteen provinces; the three Northern provinces are home to Sunni Kurds, the three northwestern and western provinces to Sunni Arabs, and the nine eastern and southern provinces to Shiite Arabs. Demographically, none of the ethnic and religious groups constitutes the absolute majority. The Kurdish provinces of Iraq share borders with Iranian, Turkish, and Syrian Kurds. Sunni parts of Iraq border Sunni countries such as Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Saudi Arabia, while Shia provinces of Iraq border Iran. This has led to interaction between these social groups and their neighboring countries. During Saddam’s rule over Iraq, there was no balance between the “society”, “sovereignty”, and “identity” of the government. People lacked a sense of belonging to Iraq as a nation or as Iraqis, and the government did not properly represent all social groups. On the one hand, the fall of Saddam’s dictatorial regime and the absence of civil and democratic culture, the rule of law, non-compliance with democratic rules, and disregard for the interests of society caused disputes and tension between various groups in Iraq, resulting in widespread turmoil and instability. A study of political developments in Iraq from 2003 to 2022 shows that democracy has survived in the country despite several civil wars. Although the elections is still accept by all different groups, competition between different sects and political groups has become instability and chaos. Since there were various sects and political groups in Iraq after Saddam, the political elites agreed to establish an associative democracy model based on a power-sharing approach. Associationalism and power sharing are complementary aspects of the same concept. Associationalism is a theory that examines power distribution in highly diversified societies. Power distribution necessitates that various parties have access to key positions of decision-making authority. According to social theory, political stability in ethnically, religiously, or linguistically heterogeneous societies is created by evaluating the power distribution at the leadership level.This research used descriptive, interpretive, and explanatory methods; this research employs an inductively based analytical-explanatory method. Consulting library and internet sources, as well as articles and geographical maps depicting the status of various religious or ethnic groups collected data. The paper illustrates the instability in Iraq by focusing on the conceptual model of associative democracy, the system of power sharing, and sectarianism. According to the findings, after the occupation by America and the fall of Saddam Hussein, the country of Iraq has faced many difficulties and after years of war, sanctions and occupation, it entered the difficult stage of transition to democracy. Current Iraq is a clear example of the identity crisis. Ethnic and religious pluralism has caused conflicting political and social differences. Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis are the main players in this country. Until 2033, different ethnicities and identities did not have the opportunity to express themselves. The American attack and the overthrow of the Baath regime brought Iraq into a new and unstable stage, and different groups and ethnicities pursued the goals and demands of their conflicting political and social identities. The downturn of the Iraqi central government has stimulated the cycle of violence and sectarianism in this country. Due to the central government's inadequacies, ethnic and religious groups, as well as politicians, have increased their expectations of gaining more power. On the other hand, sectarianism has led to government instability, increased foreign military intervention, and intensified power struggles. The securitization of sectarian identities has become a source of instability, conflict, and increased fragmentation within the borders. Although the new Iraqi constitution emphasizes a democratic or pluralistic political and legal policy, it will take a considerable amount of time for such a policy to be institutionalized or fully established. There are different views about the causes of tension and violent conflicts in Iraq. Some researchers emphasize the external factor and emphasize the role of great powers and   some regional actors. For example, some consider the occupation of Iraq by the US and the presence of the country's military forces as an important cause of instability and internal conflicts in this country. In addition, others, the presence of Israel, Arabia, and Turkey have highlighted the ethnic and religious divides in Iraq and the transfer of insecurity to other countries. In this research, emphasizing the type of political system and the population structure of Iraq deals with tensions in this country. Contemporary Iraqi history shows that Britain and France created it after the Ottoman collapse. Since then, there has been tension in this country with the integration of demographic groups with diversity and conflicts of identity in Iraq combined with the manipulation of geopolitics and artificial borders by Britain and France. During Saddam's rule over Iraq, stability was established with the means of repression and fear. Post-Saddam Iraq has been described as an example of shared or consensus democracy. Amidst the deep social divisions that characterize pluralistic societies, this model is thought to be effective in supporting democracy in a country. Heterogeneous societies are divided into sub-communities by religious, ideological, linguistic, cultural, ethnic, or racial factors, with nearly distinct political parties, influential groups, and media. Some researchers think that the present-day issues in Iraq are a result of the country's political system or associative democracy: associative democracy has caused the deepening and escalation of groupings, government inefficiency, and, finally, instability and chaos in Iraq. Most notably, pervasive disaffection with Iraq's ethno-sectarian sociopolitical system has fueled an increasingly coordinated protest movement that has brought over a million people to Baghdad’s and southern Iraqi cities’ streets since 2019. Politicians are devastated by the Iraqi government’s ineffective measures to transform a dictatorial system into a democratic system after 2003. From the perspective of Iraqi citizens, politicians use their positions only for personal gain and neglect their public responsibilities to improve the economy, security, services, and infrastructures. They claim that widespread corruption is strongly associated with ethnic sectarianism in the Iraqi parliament. According to them, although the distribution of political power based on ethnic and religious minorities may help maintain elite consensus because party-political networks are based on sects and tribal policies, they prioritize control over participation, loyalty over qualifications, and personal interests over public interests. These factors impede Iraq’s development and stability. To restore stability in Iraq, political elites should use democratic bargaining methods to achieve peace and fulfill their requirements. Supporting policies that strengthen pervasive coalitions and veto power may help to stabilize the system and reduce cultural conflicts. To sum up, effective governance in Iraq necessitates prioritizing public interests over private interests.

Lebanon is a country located in the Middle East. This country, despite its small size, is of great geopolitical significance. The political and social structure of Lebanon compared to other Arab countries in the Middle East is very different. Lebanon's social structure has unique features that distinguish it from other societies. Its democratic system is considered a defining feature which makes it different from other Arab countries. It is a consociational democracy which is applicable to the societies with deep ethnic and religious divisions. In these kinds of societies, majority democracy is not considered a feasible system. The main question posed by this article is that why and how consociational democracy could provide peace and stability in this country? The answer to this question is advanced in the framework of the hypothesis that consociational democracy based on the distribution of power in Lebanon, and supported by a foreign power, paves the way for involved groups to look for their interests in compromise and cooperation and not in conflict.

Resolution of ethnic conflicts (ECs) is crucial for restoring international peace and security, which implicates the role of international law (IL). Employing a descriptive-analytical method and relying on desk research, this contribution seeks to examine the most significant challenges to and opportunities of IL in the context of resolving ECs. The analysis identifies three principal challenges: 1) the internal contradictions inherent in peacebuilding processes that impede the realization of sustainable peace in multiethnic societies; 2) the lack or insufficiency of a minority-oriented approach in United Nations’ structure and reaction mechanisms, rendering the achievement of lasting ethnic peace elusive; and 3) the organizational discoordination and one-dimensional approach within the UN framework, which has led to the inability or difficulty of taking effective, concentrated, comprehensive, and case-specific measures to resolve ECs. Conversely, the authors propose several existing solutions in international law for addressing these challenges including: 1) mainstreaming minority rights at the UN level; and 2) establishing a specialized institution for ECs within the UN structure. This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the aforementioned challenges and opportunities faced by international law in the context of resolving ethnic conflicts.

In This Essay Is Trying to Study The Relation Between Islam and Democracy In Model of Deep Democracy and Committed Democracy. Thus, I Study This Relation in on Seven Factors of Concepts of Democracy (Political or Philosophical), Awareness From outside, Multi Approach to Democracy, Community nd Self Interaction, Communication, Situated Self and Pluralism, That Are Beyond of Current Liberal Democracy in The West, and Criticize It. This Factors Are Basis of Deep Democracy. And, Because Committed Democracy Is Taking From Shariati, s Thought, Then This Democracy Relyed on Shariati, s Thought. Finally, Is Resulted That, Shariati, s Reading on Islam, in This Sight, Is Democratic.

There are two general views on the impact of technology on democracy: a (technology is a threat to democracy, b) technology provides proper grounds for democracy.The aim of this article is to study the consequences of the influence of technology on democracy. Taking technologistic and cultural approaches, this paper studies the influence of technology on the four components of democracy as a government system- decision making policy, human beings as decision makers, community as consisting of individuals, and procedures of determining destiny-and argues that technology is an integral part of democracy in modern technological era to the extent that it entails making the new term as «technological democracy. This term overshadows the question of whether technology is a threat or opportunity to democracy. The question would be significant, when its purpose is to reconcile democracy and technology.

Religious democracy model possesses significant critical capacity in comparison to other theoretical patterns of political system. Inspired by the teachings of new critical theory and explaining critical capacity of the model of deliberative democracy order as a product of new critical theory, the author explains theoretical proximity and coordination found between deliberative democracy order and religious democracy model. Then he argues for the critical capacity of religious democracy and its higher capacity as compared to deliberative democracy order. This paper is mainly intended to shed a light on the idea of necessity of religious democracy for Muslim nations in the existing conditions of the Muslim World.

In recent modernity era, especially between big war and the annihilation of communism, the most important political division in democratic countries has been the duality of Right/Left. Often the two biggest rival parties, apart from their different names, have been representing two tendencies, the social democracy and the liberal democracy. The main difference between these two positions has been about functionality and ethicality of welfare state. Our question in this article is the following: From the point view of social and economic mechanism, the intersection of democratic countries is closer to system of preferences of social democracy or liberal democracy? It is to corroboration that, somewhat contrary to the twentieth century, a scientific-experimental and realistic approach to the social planning makes these two positions convergent in a pragmatist framework, and, despite of a propagandist atmosphere of challenge, their theoretical and ideological differences are leaving their seriousness and functionality. The conflict of Tax versus services is transferring from an ideological and ethical principle to a subject for a limited and temporary examination among a group of experts. The existence of welfare state is no more a problem, it is its ranges and limitations which is a subject of discussion and decision. Even the domain of disagreement here is to reduce.