Document Type : Original Independent Original Article
Highlights
Introduction
By identifying common features and forms of political phenomena, political concepts help us to classify them. However, due to the complexity and variability of political realities and developments, political concepts are always reductive. By selecting some essential aspects of a phenomenon, a concept reduces or ignores other aspects. The “fragile state” evolved from the conceptual development of the “failed state” and has become popular in recent years in the fields of security and conflict studies, development and state-building studies. Despite the current prevalence of this term, the more it is used, the more it loses its meaning and significance, and its explanatory power diminishes. The multiplicity of meanings and the wide range of its scope make the term politically flexible and sometimes misused, rather than a precise diagnostic tool. In many cases, Western powers intervene under the pretext of threats to their own security and that of the international community from countries with fragile states. Therefore, it is essential to clarify the different semantic layers of this political concept in order to reduce its conceptual misunderstanding and distortion, and consequently, the possibility of political abuse. Therefore, the aim of this research is to present a clearer picture of a relatively new concept. We want to answer the question, "What is a fragile state and what are its characteristics?"
Methodology
In this study, we have analytically studied the views of authors who have discussed and debated the issue of fragile state. We have tried to obtain the semantic network of fragile state in order to achieve semantic scrutiny of this concept from the perspective of supporters and opponents by identifying its semantic layers and ideological aspects, and as a result, to evaluate the possibility of using it as a diagnostic tool. Therefore, in terms of methodology, this research is descriptive-analytical and of documentary type. Since fragile state is an indicator cited by many international institutions, the sub-indices used by the Peace Fund, the World Economic Forum, especially the 2021 Global Risks Report, and the Institute for Economics and Peace have been mentioned for the sake of documenting the studies.
Results and Discussion
The Fragile States Index is an important tool for identifying common pressures, but also pressures beyond the management capacity of countries. Once vulnerabilities related to the risk of fragility are highlighted, political risks can be assessed and urgent warnings can be provided to policymakers and the public. However, most studies confirm the lack of universally accepted criteria for an objective definition of a fragile or failed state. Most studies on state fragility are based on a uniform and simplistic analysis of political institutions. These studies provide their criteria, research hypotheses and policy prescriptions based on a Western-centric approach to social order and political stability. In this context, the rhetoric about failed and fragile states cannot be separated from the military doctrine, diplomatic options and economic choices of Western powers. Therefore, it seems that despite the practical and explanatory potential of the concept of fragile state, it is possible to justify some fundamental criticisms of this concept from an epistemological and methodological perspective. When using this concept, its ideological aspects should be stated.
In this context, the use of the term failed or fragile state has met with much opposition due to its superficial, one-sided and reductionist approach to the deep challenges of various countries. Western governments have been criticized for ignoring the legacy of colonialism, and for international organizations shirk their global responsibility, or for being discriminatory and conditional in their support policies. This labeling may apply to a small number of countries and provide a basis for a global consensus to overcome the crisis, but its widespread use is aimed at stigmatizing and isolating rival countries and placing them in a state of exception. These designations indicate a specific path, especially in the policy adopted by American statesmen, and bring forward a range of strategies of punishment, sanctions, isolation, behavior change, regime change, military intervention and overthrow. Accordingly, one criticism of labeling states as failed and fragile is that the labels and frameworks and associated measures, regardless of their normative nature, are inherently political and serve the dominant interests of the global North.
Some of the criticisms of the failed state go beyond the superstructure and return to the foundations and assumptions underlying the Weberian state, with its characteristics mentioned above. The different social structures of societies must be recognized and judgments about strong and weak states made in relation to them. Just as economists measure economic deciles in terms of each country's indicators, the top deciles of a developing country may differ dramatically from the top deciles of a developed country, but they experience greater levels of satisfaction and prosperity.
Conclusion
In this article, some of the main criticisms of the fragile state have been brought forward by Western scholars themselves. These criticisms can be formulated in terms of Westernization and reductionism, the theoretical basis of which goes back to Weber's conception of the state as a presupposition and axiom. Therefore, all the criticisms that are based on the idea of the Weberian state can be mentioned here as well.
State fragility is an analytical concept that deals with the state from a functional/dysfunctional perspective. Therefore, the concept that was initially used to understand the functional problems of the state more in development discussions, gradually became saturated with Western-oriented ideological layers. Therefore, we believe that although it can be used as an analytical tool and has a suitable explanatory aspect; but its ideological aspects should be exposed and stated. On the other hand, new developments in the international arena such as the war in Ukraine have caused the use of the fragile state to explain third world countries to be questioned and this category is also considered in the analysis of some European countries.
Subjects
