Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Middle East- Security

Regional Complex

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Abstract

In this paper I will try to answer the questions: Why is the Middle East a security
region complex? and How is still working?. I chose to narrow down the demonstration to
the past years, after the Arab Spring. In order to have a clear answer for these questions, I
will base my demonstration on the Regional Security Complex theory by Barry Buzan and on
international concepts from the security domain.
To the end that reaching a conclusion, I have structured the main body into three
parts: analysis of the region (from a geographical point of view states, international
organizations, intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations and the relations
between them), threats and risks in the area (historical, geopolitical, political, economic and
security approaches), the demonstration that the Middle East is a RSC. For the core of the
paper, the demonstration, I will use the Descriptive RSCT, the matrix for area studies with
the 4 levels of analysis the security constellation: domestic one - in the states of the
region their domestically generated vulnerabilities and the consequences of these
vulnerabilities (strong/weak states); state-to-state relations; the regions interaction with
neighbouring; the role of global powers in the region.

Keywords: conflicts, terrorism, oil, insecurity, religion, threats, economic

cooperation, gates of hell.

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Introduction

Home to the Cradle of Civilization, the Middle East has seen many of the world's
oldest cultures and civilizations. This history started from the earliest human settlements,
continuing through several major pre- and post-Islamic Empires through to the modern
collection of nation-states covering the Middle East today. Therefore, home of many conflicts
of all sorts. The number of people killed in conflict in the region in the past 50 years and the
amount of money spent on weapons by the states of the region demonstrate that these other
disputes exist. Throughout the twentieth century, the Middle East remained an arena of
incessant conflict attracting global attention. As recent developments in the area have shown
it is difficult to exaggerate the significance of Middle Eastern insecurities for world politics
The Middle East region suffers from an almost total reliance on so-called zero-sum
thinking as regards security matters. This approach, in which one partys gain is necessarily
the others loss, characterizes most types of interaction in the Middle East. Instead, the group
agreed that it is necessary to slowly develop a sum-sum approach with respect to the
fundamental issues of security in the region so that all sides gain, or lose, together on a given
issue. Even if the gains are not equal on each issue every time, the basic idea is that all must
make equal gains in security over time through the mutual creation of a new regional security
order. Fundamental to the development of such an approach is recognition that security is
shared by all of the peoples of the region, rather than an object of competition. Another point
is that the development of a sum-sum approach to security is particularly important for the
smaller states of the region, although it is also important for the larger states.
Many international actors expressed concern that the various organizing concepts or
visions which are being discussed in many quarters for the future of the regions security are
all based on the exclusion of certain states of the region and peoples on national, ethnic or
religious grounds. Some of these concepts even draw legitimacy by making certain excluded
parties the villains against whom the others must band together. They agree that this is not the
way to construct a truly regional approach to security. Until this mentality is challenged, a
regional security regime will be difficult to construct. It was recognized that the region is
characterized by asymmetrical relations between its states in terms of wealth, resources,
3

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

populations and relationships with external actors. Although differences in the social,
political, economic and military power of the states of the region are inescapable and exist in
all regions, in the Middle East these discrepancies can mean the difference between a states
living in fear of its survival and not. It is difficult to imagine any other region of the world in
which the smaller and less powerful states live in genuine fear of their existence should the
regional order be challenged.
The Middle East is a region where the so-called security dilemma is acutely felt.
Simply put, as each side tries to maximize its own security through unilateral steps, such as
the acquisition of ever more capable weapons, this causes others to feel increasingly insecure.
They, in turn, take actions that are designed to increase their own security, and the cycle
repeats itself with the result that no states security is actually enhanced. All states end up
feeling even less secure in an atmosphere of ever-increasing regional military capabilities.
The problem is compounded further in that the resources devoted to military spending are
diverted from economic and social development, thus leading to an erosion of security on
another level. The Middle East will not break out of this cycle overnight. There is no magic
formula, but the group members felt that the security dilemma must be broken and that the
development of a new way of approaching security in the region is the only way to do so.
Roberson explains the constantly changing complex formation in the following way:
Because these states (in the Middle East) are new, the pattern of their relationships is
in an early stage of development. A prominent feature of the developing Middle East state
system is a constant pattern of realignment, which has thus far prevented the rise of a
hegemonic power. This feature underlines the supreme difficulty in establishing regional
security, a feature within which the Arab statesmen move and breathe. (Buzan & Rizvi, 1986:
160-61).

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Theoretical approach

Security has typically been pursued by states with the aim of guaranteeing the
states survival, based on the idea of sovereignty and territory, assigning your neighbor the
status of a potential enemy, and applying military means to achieve these ends (Waltz 1979).
Neo- Realism holding these ideas has also been the dominant approach to the study of
security and international relations since the Second World War. Certainly, most studies of
security in the Middle East have applied these rationalities in trying to understand the key
actors and their primary strategies (Owen 2003, Kedourie 1992). However, for nearly two
decades, the security concept has been subject to revision, both broadening and deepening its
scope. Since this analyze aims to demonstrate that the Middle East region is still an influent
Regional Security Complex, I am only outlining the theoretically approaches that analyzed
security in the Middle East. With the roots in accelerating globalization and the diminishing
pre-eminence of the state as the sole actor on the international scene, the core dynamics of
the state has changed considerably (Held &McGrew 2003). Hence, this report takes the two
major paradigmatic changes within the security field seriously: Firstly, rooted in the idea of
order within international politics (Bull 1977), epitomized by the writing of Buzan (1983)
and later developed within the Copenhagen school, driven by increasing international
interdependence, and in particular under the perception on structurally increased significance
of world regions, regional security complex theory has by now become an important and
established addition to traditional security analysis (Buzan 1983; Buzan and Waever 1998;
cf. jendal 2000; Schulz-Lindholm 2000; Schulz et al. 2001).
This has bearing on the security thinking of the Middle East, but it should be noted
right from the beginning that the focus on the regional level does not imply that there
necessarily are dynamics of regional cooperation, or even less regional integration at work,
but it does imply that there are significant regional dynamics in motion. Secondly, the
development of the concept of Human Security launched by UNDP, and further developed
within the UN-system (and elsewhere) to now constitute a norm of sorts, implies the
widening of the security agenda away from states security to a more people centered
approach (UNDP 1994; UN Commission on Human Security, 2003).

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Security is a relational term, and a security complex is defined as a distinguishable

system of states united by geographical proximity and a system whose:
Major processes of securitization, desecuritisation or both are so interlinked that their
national security problems cannot reasonably be analyzed or resolved apart from one another.
The formative dynamics and structure of a security complex are normally generated by the
units within it by their security perceptions of, and interactions with, each other. Buzan et
al 1998:12
The regional security complex is normally conceived of as an inter-state system
defined in terms of the patterns of amity and enmity substantially confined within some
geographical area. (Buzan 1983:7). Hence it departs from the billiard balls metaphor,
following in the 6 tradition of Hedley Bull (1977) assuming that states have relations
beyond their respective power, and that there exist some sort of order even though the
system at large is anarchic.
This security perception is/was controversial, contradicting the dominant neo-realist
approach to international affairs for at least two reasons: Firstly it left the previous absolute
focus on the state level, and secondly it introduced soft issues such as patterns of amity and
enmity into high politics. The regional approach is defended through the fact that most
political and military threats travel more easily over short distances than over long ones,
insecurity is often associated with proximity (Buzan et al 1998:11). Or in other words,
neighbors have more frequently issues with each other than with non-neighbors. Hence the
amity/enmity dimension tears the analyses away from (only) power and interest, and it is
introducing intangibles possibly as wide reaching as cultural like-mindedness, social
integration and historical relations. In other words, it allows for a more integrated and
qualitative security analysis. In it later versions it also moves beyond a state-centric view in
that it introduces the idea of heterogeneous complexes. Moreover, the security complex
theory is explicitly working with levels, putting the regional level at center but referring up
and down in the system. State rationalities constitute the complex, and external/global forces
(often) feeds it with its content and impact on its actors key strategic choices, so do subnational dynamics.

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Analysis of the region

The Middle East region can be analyzed and better understood as a RSC by looking at
some general aspects of the area: geography, states, international organizations,
intergovernmental and NGOs.
From the geographical point of view what/where is the Middle East has various
answers, because of the complexity and dynamics of the region, which during history change
greatly. The so-called modern version of the Middle East sits where Africa, Asia and Europe
meet. It is an unofficial and imprecise term that now generally encompasses the lands around
the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean Seanotably Egypt, Jordan, Israel,
Lebanon, and Syriaas well as Iran, Iraq, and the countries of the Arabian Peninsula. The
term was formerly used by Western geographers and historians to describe the region from
the Persian Gulf to Southeast Asia; Near East is sometimes used to describe the same area.
The Greater Middle East Map includes Afghanistan and Pakistan, and all the other stans,
but it also includes many North African countries like Egypt, Libya and Sudan. Greater
Middle East is an additional Eurocentric concept, introduced in the West in the 1990s, and
referring to the mostly-Islamic regions of North Africa, Western Asia and Central Asia; the
use of "Greater Middle East" however was marginal and it has recently fallen into disuse.
Various concepts are often being paralleled to Middle East, most notably Near East, Fertile
Crescent and the Levant. Near East, Levant and Fertile Crescent are geographic concepts,
which refer to large sections of the modern defined Middle East, with Near East being the
closest to Middle East in its geographic meaning. The countries of the South CaucasusArmenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia-are occasionally included in definitions of the Middle East,
according to the CIA website.
Traditional definition of the Middle East, quasi- generally accepted includes the
following states: Bahrain, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman,
Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.
State is a territorial political community for which there is an independent
organized Government. A nation state is a state whose primary loyalty is to a cultural selfidentity, which we call a nation or nationality, and is now the predominant form of state

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

organization. Nation states possess sovereignty and legitimacy. The significance of the nation
state is that, once consolidated around a particular nationality, it is a stable form of state
organization. From this point of view in particular, we can see that there are some problems
in the Middle East when it comes to the legitimacy of the states Syria and Egypt faced or
still face some violent protests against their governments and the control of the army over the
people is non-existent, they are controlled by insurgents and non-state actors. When it comes
to Palestine, here are another problems in terms of legitimacy, but from all the countries in
the Middle East, only Israel doesn`t recognize Palestine and Palestinian National Authority
(PNA) as a self-governing interim administration in the Palestinian territories and
maintains de facto military control in the territories even in areas officially under the
government of the PNA. Oman and Jordan have no position towards it, but the rest of the
state has even diplomatically relations.
Considering how the states are integrated in the International organizations, it is
observable that all the states cooperate in one way or another, and that they are trying to
produce a form of stability in the region. At an intergovernmental level, they cooperate in the
United Nations; all states included in the Middle East region are member states of the UN
General Assembly, except Palestine which is an observer state.
They also assist each other in The Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the
Gulf, which is a regional intergovernmental political and economic union established in Abu
Dhabi on 25 May 1981. Its member states are all Arab states of the Persian Gulf, except for
Iraq: the Islamic monarchies of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United
Arab Emirates (the GCC states).
The Arab League is the most important and fruitful cooperation of the region. It was
formed in Cairo on 22 March 1945 with six members: Kingdom of Egypt, Kingdom of Iraq,
Transjordan (renamed Jordan in 1949), Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Syria. It has now 21
member states, of which also in Middle East region: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait,
Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Yemen, Syria suspended since
November 2011, as a consequence of government repression during the ongoing uprising and
civil war. The League's main goal is to "draw closer the relations between member States and
co-ordinate collaboration between them, to safeguard their independence and sovereignty,
and to consider in a general way the affairs and interests of the Arab countries. The Arab

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

League facilitates political, economic, cultural, scientific and social programs designed to
promote the interests of the Arab world.
The Council of Arab Economic Unity (CAEU) was founded by some of the Middle East
region countries: Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab
Emirates and Yemen on June 3, 1957. It became effective on May 30, 1964 with the goal of
achieving economic unity among its member states. The council objectives are: coordinate
joint economic development, formulate policies related to agriculture, industry and internal
trade, financial and monetary policies with the aim of achieving monetary unity, common
legislation on labor and social security.
Greater Arab Free Trade Area (GAFTA) is a pan-Arab free trade zone that came into
existence in 1997. It was founded by 14 countries (now 18), some of them part of the Middle
East region: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, Syria and the United Arab Emirates. The members participate in 96% of the total
internal Arab trade and 95% with the rest of the world by applying special conditions for
instruct the inter-customs fees, applying the locality of the Arab products, private sectors,
communication, customs duties.
Besides the states, the region is also heavily influenced by non-state actors. The ones that
have the biggest influence to change the security of the area are the most important
international/regional terrorist groups, based (or with safe heavens) in that region: Hamas and
Army of Islam (Palestine), Hezbollah (Lebanon, Iraq), Al-Qa`ida (Saudi Arabia HQ), ISIL
(Iraq), Al-Nusra Front (Syria). The insurgents in that area also have a degree of sway, their
actions can and, in most cases, influence strongly the security and have a great participation
in the unsteadiness of the region. Local and international NGOs, as well as international
organizations (peace-keeping, economic, military, etc) extent a vast reach in the Middle East
(for example, EU and NATO).
Threats and risks in the area
Threats and risks are indeed very subjective. What is perceived as a threat for some,
doesn`t necessarily has to be one for the others. But there are some important factors that
determine the threats and risks in a region: history, geopolitics, politics, economy and
security.

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

From the historical point of view, the Middle East is one of the most (maybe the
most, but that can be interpreted as subjectivity) complex, dynamic, unsettled and inconstant
areas in the world. Given the fact that its history precedes even the Christian timeline and
calendar, in order to keep things tight and clear in this paper, I chose to analyze the post-Arab
Spring period and to prove what kind of RSC is the Middle East region after this historical
event. The Middle Eastern RSC was born fighting, many of the conflicts date before Christ
and some of them are still active today the Israeli Palestinian war has its root prior to our
calendars, and the dynamic of that are still present today. What is clear even nowadays is that
all the conflicts, wars and battles have a common ground: faith/religion/culture. This crucial
difference led to two forms of conflicts: the Arabs versus the others (non-Arabs, Jews,
Iranians) and Arabs versus Arabs (the construction of Arab nationalism has generated
considerably more inter-Arab rivalry and conflict than cooperation and harmony, same with
inter-Islamic relations). Such interaction alone was sufficient to constitute an Arab state
system, and in our terms it looks like a proto-RSC (Podeh: 1998). Considering that Middle
East is a hot area, any of the conflicts that set forth sometime (regardless of the exactly
period), mostly those who are now in a boiling point, currently under a peace settling, but
under a fragile one (Palestine - Israel; Israel Syria; Lebanon Israel; Egypt- Palestine, etc)
have the potential to escalate and to return to the conflict stage.
Oil. That is what the modern Middle Eastern geopolitics and politics have usually
been about. Given the vast energy resources that form the backbone of western economies,
influence and involvement in the Middle East has been of paramount importance for the
former and current imperial and super powers, including France, Britain, USA and the former
Soviet Union.
In September 2002, Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa presciently warned
that the gates of hell would open if the United States invaded Iraq. Not heeding his
warning, the United States emphatically ripped those gates from their hinges in March 2003;
since then the entire region now sits precariously wedged just inside the entrance staring into
the inferno. Indeed, the entire world is feeling the heat. Those gates are still wide open, and
sometimes the region`s trouble doesn`t come from outside, but from within. Politics in the
Middle East is almost a tabu to talk about, because with the exception of Israel, the rest of the
countries are ruled by totalitarian regimes. Most of them are led under terror and fear, and
unfortunately, in those countries all is reduced to resources and money. Furthermore, the
politics and geopolitics are a result of what the nature has given to them and how they
10

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

convert what they have into money. There is no such thing as principles, not even mentioning
democracy or diplomacy, because, as History has showed us, for some states in the region,
it`s a matter of survival. Hence, the risks of the area, when we talk about political and
geopolitical factors are always present, as long as there are avaricious and corrupt
governments in the Middle East; and as long as there are Terrorists` political parties (Fatah,
Hamas). Also, the region is filled with political and religious (Islamic mostly) extremism. A
second Arab Spring and winter are a real threat.
The popular uprisings that have swept the Middle East in recent years are remaking
the political, social, cultural, ideological, and economic landscapes of the region. Egypt,
Libya, Yemen, and Bahrain are in turmoil. Syria is engulfed in a civil war. Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Jordan are seeking to quell unrest in their own
countries. Israel is concerned about the potential for new threats to emerge from the
instability in its neighborhood and remains ever vigilant over Iran's ongoing nuclear
development as the search for peace between Israelis and Palestinians continues. Non-Arab
regional actors like Iran are using the changes in the Arab world to extend their influence in
the region. Islamist parties have capitalized on new opportunities to advance their agendas in
the political arena, backed with electoral legitimacy, following years of repression at the
hands of authoritarian leaders. In some countries, these parties are confronting a fierce
backlash due to incompetence and their own authoritarian approach to governance. The
ongoing upheaval in the Middle East poses new challenges for the United States. Washington
continues to look to secure energy supplies, protect Israel's well-being, and preserve regional
stability. However, the policies most likely to achieve these ends at acceptable costs are open
to fresh debate. As the United States struggles to map new policies, regional leaders question
its political will to remain a power in the region.
Economically, the region itself is considered to be the richest in the world. But, when
we actually look at the region and divide and analyze it by state`s economies, it`s observable
that there is a big gap between very rich states, such as Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Israel, Bahrain,
Oman and Saudi Arabia and the poor ones Iraq, Palestine (is a special case, because it is ruled
by world`s second richest terrorist group), Syria, Yemen. Without help, those poor states will
eventually collapse and they won`t be able to fight with poverty, terrorism and internal or
external crisis for long. By collapsing, they will affect the region`s economy and they
represent a threat for the entire area. Another great risk is the rapid decrease of the oil`s price,

11

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

a factor that affects the countries that base their economies on oil export: Saudi Arabia, Iran
and Iraq.
The Middle East region is a highly securitized part of the world with
multidimensional security threats on several levels in the system. The region also experiences
several more or less manifest conflicts with violent outlets, and risks for further escalation.
The conflicts have, moreover, both deep historical roots and overwhelming vested major
power interests. As no other region in the world, the conflicts seem to be both durable and
able to cause political turmoil far beyond the borders of the region itself (being crucial to the
world (Bouillon: 2007). It is obvious that security concerns in this region is of major
significance (to the region and also outside world), but also that there are no simple or short
term solutions to the security dilemmas at hand.
Furthermore, the region itself contains contentious underlying security liabilities such
as religious radicalism, an ethnic mosaic, a strained resource base (water, arable land), highly
attractive natural resources (oil, gas), widespread terrorism, unfinished state-building
projects, democratic deficits (or worse), repressive gender relations, major power patrons,
and growing poverty problems, which all accompany the traditional security problems as
typically seen being between states and acted out through diplomacy (at best) or violence (at
worst). Historically, the region gives evidence of limited ability to solve its internal security
problems. In combination, this creates a highly complex and fragile system, where several of
the above mentioned security issues are inter-related and has system-wide, regional,
implications (Milton-Edwards 2006, Fawcett 2009). Nowadays, the highest security risk and
threat are those that come from the security interdependence of the area, the Iranian nuclear
threat, the conflicts between Israel and its neighbors and terrorists that are spread cross
borders (Hezbollah is present in Syria and Lebanon) and the Palestine-Israel conflict
(Jerusalem, West Bank, Gaza strip), ISIL spreading furthermore (already in Egypt, Gaza,
Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Syria).
DESCRIPTIVE RSCT - the security constellation
The domestic factor can be analyzed by dividing the countries of the region into weak
states, strong states and failed states, based on the Theories of Governance. There are five
categories of parameters (political goods) that determine whether a state is in a category:
safety and security; rule of law and transparency; participation and respect for human rights;
sustainable economic opportunity and human development.
12

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Safety &

Rule of Law &

Participation &

Sustainable

Human

Security

Transparency

Respect

Economic Opp.

Development

for

Human Rights
Bahrain

high

normal

normal

high

normal

Egypt

poor

poor

poor

poor

poor

Iran

high

poor

normal

high

normal

Iraq

poor

poor

normal

poor

poor

Israel

high

high

high

high

high

Jordan

high

high

high

high

normal

Kuwait

normal

normal

normal

high

normal

Lebanon

normal

normal

normal

high

normal

Oman

normal

normal

normal

high

high

Palestine

poor

poor

poor

poor

poor

Qatar

high

poor

normal

high

high

Saudi Arabia

high

poor

normal

high

normal

Syria

poor

poor

poor

high

poor

UAE

high

poor

normal

normal

normal

Yemen

high

poor

poor

poor

poor

poor / normal / high

From this matrix, we can see that there are only two strong states, capable of sustaining
all the five factors: Israel and Jordan. There are also the hollow strong states, where states
security may be just a faade (mask offered by the dictatorship) linked with good economic
development: Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran and UAE. The weak
states are: Yemen, Lebanon Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine. Those who are heading to
failing states, they are currently in the final descent into outright failure comes when a nationstate loses legitimacy when it forfeits the mandate of heaven are: Egypt, Syria and Iraq.
The consequences of this division is visible in the security (or the absence of it) and in the
conflict zone. Because so many of the Middle Easts states are in reality weak (or
fragile), because they underperform, because they frequently disappoint their citizens or, at
worst, foster ethnic or linguistic-derived discrimination, the Middle East regions several
Weak states (including a handful of monarchies) frequently lie at the cusp of failure, and
conflict.

13

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Trying to understand the complexities of Middle East political settlements can seem
like an impenetrable task and the tangled and changing relations between governments and
groups in the region are a common subject of discussion. What's more, instead of clarifying
the chaos, maps or charts that break down the various conflicts and alliances often merely
prove how absurdly complex the situation really is.
When looking at state to state relations, I deem that the Middle East region is one of the
most volatile places in the world. There isn`t another area where the shifts in the amity/enemy
patterns is more abruptly and more temporary than what`s happening between the states in
the Middle East RSC. Only one thing is constant, and that is change. Rarely based on rational
or logical reasons, the unsteadiness comes from more shadowing motives, many times hard to
understand. Being the home base of some of the world`s best intelligence agencies,
everybody spies on everybody, therefore there is no such thing as total trust. There is, in
exchange a high degree of mistrust. Some of the factors that influence the variations are:
history, economy, religion, security (military, terrorism and fear), joint interests and common
enemies. Giving the instability of the area, under constant threat, it is normal to complicate
even more the relations and to have diplomatically intercommunication, when the situations
are fit for a solution.
Current amities/enemies in the Middle East
Official allies and coalitions (based on military, economic or social official bilateral accords):

Bahrain
Egypt

Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon,
Yemen

Iran

Iraq, Syria

Iraq

Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Oman, Jordan, Lebanon

Israel

Egypt

Jordan

Iraq, Palestine, Kuwait, Egypt

Kuwait

Jordan, Egypt, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iran

14

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Lebanon

Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia

Palestine

Saudi Arabia

Oman

Qatar, Iran, Iraq, Yemen

Mutual declared enemies:

Bahrain

Israel, Iran

Egypt

Qatar, Syria

Iran

Israel, Saudi Arabia , Bahrain

Iraq

Bahrain, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuweit

Israel

Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Yemen, Jordan, Lebanon,

Kuwait, Syria, Qatar

Jordan

Saudi Arabia, Syria

Kuwait

Israel, Iraq, Syria, Yemen

Lebanon

Syria, Israel, Palestine, Iran

In some cases, thing are not black or white when it comes to settling a clear relation
between the states in the Middle East, there are some complicated factors that determine a
shifting relation towards the others, depending solely on momentary interests and decisions.
The complicated relations, now currently under a mobile decisions are: Egypt and
Iran, Iran and Palestine, Israel and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel, Oman and UAE.
The regions interaction with neighbouring countries is quite limited, as the intertaction
internally defines the complex. Even so, the Middle East RSC has some adjacent regional
security sub-complexes encompassed in it: the Gulf (Iran, Iraq, Gulf Arab states led by Saudi
Arabia) , the Maghreb, the Levant.
This sub-complex involves principally Israel and its immediate neighbors, and is a
mixture of states (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan) and non-state actors (PLO, Hamas,
Hezbollah). Several countries further aeld have been directly engaged against Israel in
signicant ways (Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Libya, and Tunisia), giving rhetorical,
nancial, and sometimes military support. Nearly all Arab countries were engaged to some
degree, even if only rhetorically, and the effects of the wars had a major impact on inter-Arab

15

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

politics, particularly on the waxing and waning of Egypts fortunes as the leader of the Arab
world, and the consequent opportunities for Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and others to bid for that role
(Tibi 1993).
The Gulf sub-complex formed after Britains withdrawal from the area in 1971. It
centered on a triangular rivalry among Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf Arab states led by Saudi
Arabia. There is also a peripheral rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Yemen (and within
Yemen), which has generated a lot of local wars, and has at times drawn in wider Arab
participation along rival royalist versus radical lines. Although the Gulf added a second core
to the Middle Eastern RSC, the nature of its internal security dynamics did not generate
anything like the same symbolic intensity that enabled the ArabIsraeli one to tie The Middle
Eastern RSC together a wide geographical spread of Arab and Islamic states. But the close
geographical proximity of these two cores means that, despite their independent local
dynamics, there is a lot of crossover between them, and this helps to knit the whole RSC
together.
The third, weaker, sub-complex in the Middle East during this period was in the
Maghreb. It was basically about a shifting and uneasy set of relationships among Libya,
Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco (and Western Sahara). But for the Maghreb, as also further
east, the border with Africa was blurred: Maghreb security dynamics pushed into Chad,
Western Sahara, and Mauritania; and Libya and Morocco (and Israel) played politics in
several sub-Saharan states. The main regional security problem in the Maghreb was the
Moroccan annexation of Western Sahara starting in 1975, which led to a twelve-year tension
with Algeria and Libya, who backed the Polisario ghters against Morocco.
One could argue that various security issues among states link the states national
security concerns together. The Middle East could also be seen as a regional security
complex full of other sets of security complexes, or sub-complexes, which all have their own
security issues that connect the states together in inextricably entangled relations. For
instance, the Palestinian issue is a security concern for many states in the region, particularly
within the Mashrek, and forms thereby, in an analytical way, the Palestinian-Israeli security
complex. The Israeli-Palestinian security complex can be defined as including the
Palestinians (PLO/PA), Israel and the countries that have been at war with Israel and that had,
or still have, parts of their territory under Israeli occupation (Egypt, Jordan, Syria and
Lebanon) (Schulz 1989). In a similar vein the rivers Euphrates and Tigris form the security
16

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

issue for the three user states, Turkey, Syria and Iraq, and thereby form a hydropolitical
security complex (Schulz 1995, Swain 2004).
Being an area where major international political and economic challenges are being
played out, the instability sometimes comes from outside of the Middle East, creating
tensions that are shaping the global environment in which other state actors operate.
As responsible international actors, many countries sought over a long period to play a
constructive role in efforts to deal with sources of tensions and conflicts in the Middle East.
Many contributions have been made mainly through peacekeeping deployments, targeted aid
assistance and diplomatic support for international negotiations, and through bilateral
relations with governments in the region.
The global powers have a history of involving in the Middle East since the Cold War for
economic, political and security purposes. The US has been involved military, political and
economically in the region. Other countries are involved only military and economically Russia, UK, Germany, France; while China and India benefit from the economy of the
region.

Conclusions

In terms of evolution, the Middle East stands poised at the edge of an era of rapid change
from which there is no going back. Its citizens and their leaders have difficult choices to
make. They can go on as before; this is the easy path in a political sense. Or they can
summon the courage to attempt some difficult and even frightening changes; this will be
much harder politically. Everybody agrees that change is coming to the region. The
politically easy path, going on as before, will not prevent it. Instead, it will ultimately lead to
change under conditions of greater suffering and unpredictability. Nor will some states be
able to shield themselves from the adverse effects of change by virtue of advanced
technology or wealth. The kinds of crises which confront the Middle East in the near future
will affect everyone in the region and many outside of it at a basic level. The only way to
17

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

avoid them is to prevent them. And the only way to prevent them is to accept the notion that
the security of the Middle East is an indivisible whole which its peoples must stop competing
over and begin to shape together through cooperation.
The Middle East regional security complex is one of the most changing landscape in the
world, due to the complexity of the factors that influence it, both internal as external. I deem
that by using the RSC theoretical approach offered by Buzan and Weaver and by analyzing
the region through the geographical point of view states, international organizations,
intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations and the relations between them, I
explained the dynamics of the region.
Being on of the most volatile areas, the Middle East is on a very risky path, as history has
shown, and still faces risks coming from all points geopolitical, social, religious,
economical and security.
The Middle East is a place where an autonomous regional level of security has operated
strongly for several decades, despite continuous and heavy impositions from the global
level. Its RSC is a clear example of a conflict formation, if one that is unusually large and
complicated, and that also possesses some distinctive cultural features. - Barry Buzan

Bibliography

Bassam, Tibi, Fundamentalisms and Society, University of Chicago Press, 1993;

Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, Columbia
University Press, 2002;
Bouillon, Markus E. David Malone, Ben Rowswell ,Iraq: preventing a new
generation of conflict , Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2007;
Buzan, Barry and Waever, Ole, Regions and Power, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 2003;
Buzan, Barry and Hansen, Lene, The Evolution of International Security Studies,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009;
Buzan, Barry, Waever, Ole and Jaap de Wilde, Security: A New Framework for
Analysis, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1998;
Fawcett, Louise, International Relations of the Middle East , Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 2009;

18

Regional Security

Blaga Ioana Iulia, SD II

Podeh, Ellie, The emergence of the Arab state system reconsidered, (Jerusalem,
Journal: Diplomacy and Statecraft, 1998;
Schulz, Helena Lindholm, and Juliane Hammer, The Palestinian Diaspora:
Formation of Identities and Politics of Homeland, London, Routledge, 2003;
Schulz, M., F. Sderbaum, and J. jendal, Regionalization in a Globalizing World,
London, Zed Press, 2001;
Schulz, Michael, Lindholm Schulz , The Middle East: Regional Instability and
Fragmentation, London/Ann Arbor, Pluto Press, 2005;
Waltz, Kenneth Neal, Theory of international politics, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.,
1979.

19