I was not surprised when Professor Radwan Al-Sayed phoned to invite me to contribute a paper to the conference “Peace, Identity and Coexistence” hosted by Mohamed bin Zayed University in the United Arab Emirates. For the most part, the participants were experts in Islamic law and known for their ability to clarify Islam’s capacities to foster the noble aims expressed by the conference’s title. It was understood that their discussions would constitute a reply to both Orientalists and to the notions espoused by radical Islamist thinkers and terrorist organisations.
As a political scientist involved in peace building, I admired the organisers’ courage in addressing this subject in these times of widespread conflict. The subject brought me back to a study I took part in 16 years ago about identity, not only as a distinct trait acquired by dint of belonging to a country or national heritage, but also as a dynamic aspect of life.
The UAE is a celebration of diversity, plurality and federalism grounded in mutual support, close communication and the spirit of unity over division. It serves as a constant testimony to the wisdom of its founding fathers while functioning as a living organism that breathes the essence of its establishment, substance and vitality. When it was first founded, the UAE had already made significant strides in solar energy, launching Masdar City as a model for sustainable living. The city has since become a global landmark, while the UAE has gone on to make breakthroughs in space exploration to the moon, Mars and beyond. The UAE embodies an unbroken continuum, linking the past, present and the future.
The study on identity was merely an attempt to portray the prevailing reality in distilled form. But while the sense of identity existed, it had been taken for granted; it had not been seen as something dynamic that required constant energy and vitality. Then, Al-Azhar’s and the Vatican’s response to political developments, as epitomised in the historic meeting between them, provided a potent symbol of human fraternity and an affirmation that humankind is capable of transcending the barriers between East and West and the Arabs and the world.
On this occasion, identity is presented as an even more complex concept – one linked to another equally complex one: peace. At the level of the individual, peace refers to safety and peace of mind in life and tranquillity in death – as in a restful eternal peace until the Day of Judgement. In political science, identity and peace are tied to a third intricate concept: the state. This is an entity that manifests itself geographically through its borders, politically through the exercise of sovereignty within those borders, and socially through citizens’ sense of their national character – the traits that distinguish them from other peoples – and through patriotism, which stirs people to rise when the flag is raised, to fight for their country in battle, and to celebrate collectively after a national football victory.
If political science is defined as the science of allocation of resources and values, then it is connected to the citizen who pays taxes and sacrifices himself for his country, while the state offers peace and security.
Peace is, of course, crucial to society at large. It encompasses such dualities as stability and upheaval, openness and insularism, centralisation and decentralisation, democracy and authoritarianism. In all its forms, peace generates continuity in thought, governance and the management of society. It inherently rejects any violent disruption that breaks this continuity.
This intricate system constantly influences identity, especially when contradictions intensify, be they in ideas or socio-political divides. International relations introduce another set of factors that have a powerful impact on identity: threats to a state’s borders, social cohesion, and the legitimacy of its authority. All such factors prompt a reassessment of national identity.
The value of peace grows when a national polity realises destiny, declares its birth within the international community, and contributes something new and unique to the transnational human experience. The value increases further when identity remains cohesive, borders are secure, and society maintains intellectual and class harmony. Such factors fortify a nation’s immunity against identity fragmentation, social division and external threats.
Two international relations concepts are closely connected with the stability of the state: geopolitics and geo-economics. The former is competitive, the latter cooperative. Geopolitics shapes the geographical framework of regional relations and the cost of defending the state. Geo-economics lays the foundation for returns from expansion and added value. Between these two, national identity is tapped by the rational mind for its capacities for defence, on the one hand and for its ability to seize available opportunities and to avoid conflict, on the other.
The main challenge facing identity in our era is the absence of geography. Under the influence of time, geography becomes history, whereas in the cyber realm it vanishes, giving rise to a new universal condition. This condition is not necessarily evil. Rather, like humanity itself, it contains both good and evil. The task of new generations is to shape identity in a borderless world, where time is more relative than ever, and in which our planet, if it survives, is paying a steep price for the challenges of identity.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 1 May, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: