Dr. Amal Moussa

Identity, in its various dimensions—whether individual or collective—is an issue of extreme sensitivity and significance. Each dimension of identity is constructed through representations and ideas, most of which are transmitted through institutions of socialization that contribute to the reproduction of identities.

Let us begin by clarifying an important point: identity in itself is something wonderful. Human beings alone construct their identities through reason, symbols, culture, and social integration. Identity is a symbolic card of recognition through which defining features are determined—features that reflect the greatness of humanity through its vast, deep, and ancient cultural heritage.

At this level of meaning—through which the individual answers the question “Who am I?”—identity appears to be the source from which individuals, peoples, and groups write their narratives. This, as previously noted, is both positive and valuable.

Yet history tells us that identity has also borne responsibility for the enormous number of wars that have erupted and the conflicts that have raged—and continue to rage—throughout time. In this context, it is important to refer to the European experience in addressing conflicts fueled by ethnic and sectarian tensions. Europe succeeded in closing this chapter and establishing an open identity that prioritizes shared history above other defining elements. This shift helped create social and political environments grounded in a very old idea articulated by Aristotle—the idea of peaceful coexistence.

Awareness of the requirements of renaissance, progress, modernization, and citizenship made it necessary to uproot the culture of “pure identity.” In fact, Europe succeeded remarkably in addressing one of the most dangerous challenges: the issue of multiple identities, thereby preventing identity-based clashes.

To understand the importance of Europe’s achievement in managing identity, one must recognize that this “old continent,” a cradle of ancient cultures and migration pathways, is characterized by significant ethnic, cultural, religious, and sectarian diversity. Europe includes Germanic, Latin, and Slavic ethnic groups, in addition to approximately three percent of people with non-European origins.

On the religious level, about one-third of Europeans are Catholic, one-quarter are Orthodox, more than one-tenth are Protestant, and less than one-quarter identify as non-religious, alongside other religious minorities.

It can therefore be said that Europe successfully invested this diversity in shaping the Europe we know today. It closed painful and bloody chapters of its history and abandoned futile conflicts. Today, the idea of citizenship has become the unifying identity.

In contrast to Europe’s experience—where identity conflicts were gradually defused and peaceful coexistence strengthened—the Middle East remains entangled in conflicts fueled by religious, sectarian, and ethnic identities. Here lies one of the region’s central weaknesses: its failure to transform diversity into a source of strength and enrichment.

The Middle East, despite being the cradle of the Abrahamic religions and home to societies in which Muslims constitute more than 90 percent of the population, continues to experience persistent and costly conflicts. These conflicts are often fueled by adversaries skilled in igniting identity-based divisions. Such manipulation would not succeed without fertile ground for it. If the peoples of the Middle East were to address ethnic and sectarian diversity wisely—moving it from the collective political sphere to the personal sphere—and focus instead on shared elements, diversity could become a source of capital for prosperity, development, and progress.

Much of what is happening in the Middle East today indicates that the region has not yet resolved its most fundamental problem, nor succeeded in addressing the root causes of many of its conflicts—conflicts that in turn generate instability and undermine coexistence. The greater danger is that these conflicts deepen identity-based resentments and reinforce inward-looking identities, preventing collective unity around a shared banner, a national project, and a common future. All of this constitutes a major obstacle to development, construction, and progress.

There is also the duality of dominant identities and minority identities, which requires deep and structural solutions because it generates conflict and violence. Both the history and the present of the Middle East testify to this reality. Likewise, systems of governance based on ethnic and religious quota-sharing have shown little success. This means that societies must abandon thinking within the prisons of identity and instead rely on a principle that strengthens feelings of belonging to the nation—namely, shared history, which preserves the foundations of peaceful coexistence.

Continuing to submit to identities centered on ethnicity and sectarianism means perpetuating conflict and making it impossible to build a stable Middle East capable of development and progress.

Moreover, attachment to rigid ethnic and sectarian identity structures will transform a region rich in heritage and global significance into one that is easily provoked and vulnerable. A single spark is enough to ignite the flames.

In conclusion:
Enough of turning ethnic and religious diversity from a source of richness into a cause of conflict and bloodshed. Enough of turning pure gold into bombs of death.