This text aims to fill a gap in the field of Middle Eastern political studies by combining international relations theory with concrete case studies. It begins with an overview of the rules and features of the Middle East regional system—the arena in which the local states, including Egypt, Turkey, Iran, Israel and the Arab states of Syria, Jordan and Iraq, operate. The book goes on to analyse foreign-policy-making in key states, illustrating how systemic determinants constrain this policy-making, and how these constraints are dealt with in distinctive ways depending on the particular domestic features of the individual states. Finally, it goes on to look at the outcomes of state policies by examining several major conflicts including the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Gulf War, and the system of regional alignment. The study assesses the impact of international penetration in the region, including the historic reasons behind the formation of the regional state system. It also analyses the continued role of external great powers, such as the United States and the former Soviet Union, and explains the process by which the region has become incorporated into the global capitalist market.
relations, this study will deploy a combination of several to capture its complex reality.
The Middle East is arguably the epicentre of world crisis, chronically war-prone and the site of the world’s most protracted conflicts. It appears to be the region where the anarchy and insecurity seen by the realist school of internationalpolitics as the main feature of states systems remains most in evidence and where the realist paradigm retains its greatest relevance. Yet neo-realism’s 1 a-historical tendency to assume states systems to be unchanging
InternationalPolitical Economy, domestic politics
InternationalPolitical Economy (IPE) had already achieved
prominence as a field of study by the start of the 21st
century, but its role has changed dramatically, with issues
of democratic governance and policy-making moving to the
forefront. Originally, however, the roots of IPE lay in economic aspects of relations among nation-states in the international system – foreign economic policy, trade, the spread
of production systems and
-Arab leadership, trumpeting their own Arab credentials and impugning those of rivals, sought to sway public opinion and to mobilise the Arab ‘street’ to pressure (even overthrow) rival governments from below. The effectiveness of such cross-border appeals to the populations of other states was itself testimony to the existence of common identities and norms transcending borders.
Such a unique context should make the conduct of inter-Arab politics qualitatively different from internationalpolitics, but how far this is so is a matter of controversy
dependency relationships. To many Arabs and Muslims, the struggle with imperialism, far from being mere history, continues, as imperialism reinvents itself in new forms. The Middle East has become the one world region where anti-imperialist nationalism, obsolete elsewhere, remains alive and where an indigenous ideology, Islam, provides a world view still resistant to West-centric globalisation. This dynamic explains much of the internationalpolitics of the region.
The age of imperialism and the imposition of the Middle East states system
9 Paternalistic Care and
Transformative Recognition in InternationalPolitics
In this chapter, I address what
Uma Narayan described in 1995 as ‘the self-serving collaboration
between elements of colonial rights discourse and care discourse’
( 1995 : 133). Narayan argues that, in
Contrary to international law, internationalpolitical theory and political philosophy paid scant attention to the ethics of
intervention in the long nineteenth century. 1 As for humanitarian intervention per se, there is nothing,
apart from cursory remarks by John Stuart Mill and Giuseppe Mazzini. On the wider
question of intervention and non-intervention we will refer to their views and to
those of Kant, Hegel and Cobden.
Based on today’s distinction
and global social change
Political economy is concerned with the historically constituted frameworks or structures within which political and economic activity takes
place. It stands back from the apparent fixity of the present to ask how
the existing structures came into being and how they may be changing,
or how they may be induced to change. In this sense, political economy is
critical theory. (Cox, 1995: 32)
he field of IPE is inextricably bound up with understandings of global
social transformation. Indeed, for many
the core great powers and the internationalpolitical economy constitutes a dilemma for regional states. The core is both the indispensable source of many crucial resources and of constraints on the autonomy of regional states. The constraining impact of the core ranges from the threat of active military intervention or economic sanctions to the leverage derived from the dependency of regional states, maximised where there is high need and a lack of alternatives for the client state. In extreme cases, foreign policy may be chiefly designed to access economic
made a difference was in its effect on these deeper seated factors: while Nasser would probably have worked against pressures for a separate peace, Sadat’s power needs led him to push them forward. Moreover, as was seen in chapter 5 , Sadat’s wishful thinking, craving for Western approval and impulsive propensity to make concessions led him to play his cards poorly in the extended peace negotiations. By contrast Asad’s ‘realist’ view of internationalpolitics, which put no faith in the good intentions of either Israel or the US, his extreme wariness of being tricked