Understanding the Role of State Identity in Foreign Policy Decision-Making

The London School of Economics and Political Science UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF STATE IDENTITY IN FOREIGN POLICY DECISION-MAKING The Rise and Demise of Saudi–Iranian Rapprochement (1997–2009) ADEL ALTORAIFI A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy London, October 2012 1 To Mom and Dad—for everything. 2 DECLARATION I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. The final word count of this thesis, including titles, footnotes and in-text citations, is 105,889 words. 3 ABSTRACT The objective of the thesis is to study the concept of state identity and its role in foreign policy decision-making through a constructivist analysis, with particular focus on the Saudi–Iranian rapprochement of 1997. While there has been a recent growth in the study of ideational factors and their effects on foreign policy in the Gulf, state identity remains understudied within mainstream International Relations (IR), Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA), and even Middle Eastern studies literature, despite its importance and manifestation in the region’s foreign policy discourses. The aim is to challenge purely realist and power-based explanations that have dominated the discourse on Middle Eastern foreign policy—and in particular, the examination of Saudi–Iranian relations. Saudi Arabia and Iran have played key roles in Gulf security for the past four decades, yet there have been few studies addressing their bilateral relations. Traditionally, differences—including sectarianism, nationalism, revolutionary ideology, competition over regional hegemony, oil prices, policy towards US military presence in the Gulf, and disagreements over the hajj—are often cited as reasons for their rivalry, yet these differences do not on their own offer a convincingly clear explanation as to why the rapprochement took place at that particular time, or why it thrived—and subsequently declined—despite the continuing presence of these issues. The primary purpose of the thesis is to analyse and understand the reasons behind the rise and demise of the Saudi–Iranian rapprochement of 1997. By focusing on ideational and materialist factors, the thesis seeks to demonstrate how changes in state identity—particularly in the official foreign policy discourse—indicates changes in policy, and therefore a shift in the amity–enmity pattern between the two states. Without discarding the value of realist explanations, the thesis will argue that the rapprochement process of 1997 has been significantly (though not exclusively) influenced by changes in state identity in each state. Moreover, this thesis provides a theoretical framework based on the concept of state identity and role theory (“self versus other”) to study the evolution of enmity, the rise of the rapprochement process during the Khatami presidency (1997–2005), and the subsequent revival of Saudi–Iranian rivalry during President Ahmadinejad’s first term (2005–2009). 4 The main argument of this thesis is that ideational and materialist factors were instrumental in the demise of the rapprochement process, but the change in Iran’s state identity during the first term of President Ahmadinejad altered the perception of each state towards the other. Thus, the relationship transformed from a state of relative friendliness to a state of enmity and rivalry. This is explained by examining the muqawama–mumana’a discourse and the “moderates” versus “radicals” debate that consumed the narrative of Saudi–Iranian relations between 2005 and 2009. The methods employed in answering these research questions and hypotheses are largely structured around a chronological account of the development and formation of state identities and an analysis of each state’s foreign policy discourse during the period in question. This will be supplemented by qualitative interviews with individuals who participated in the rapprochement process, and will draw upon new archival material that has hitherto not been utilised in the literature on this subject. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Along the winding road to completion of this thesis I have been fortunate enough to meet many wonderful people who have made the long and oft-times difficult journey more than worthwhile, many of whom I hope will remain lifelong friends. My deepest gratitude is owed to all of them. Indeed, I am put in mind of the famous words of Sir Winston Churchill and would like to say that never in the field of International Relations has so much been owed to so many by one person. I would first like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Katerina Dalacoura, for her gracious direction, patience and guidance, for which I am truly indebted. From her, I learned the principles of academic research, objectivity, and the ethics of scientific inquiry. She has read every single sentence many times over. She truly embodies the wise words of Nikos Kazantzakis: ‘True teachers are those who use themselves as bridges over which they invite their students to cross; then, having facilitated their crossing, joyfully collapse, encouraging them to create their own’. Για όλα, σας ευχαριστώ πολύ. Sincere thanks are also due to HRH Prince Faisal bin Salman al-Saud for his continuous support, belief and encouragement. I would also like to express my gratitude to the tremendous cast of individuals who granted me interviews, in particular HRH Prince Turki al-Faisal at Gerogetown University, Ambassador Adel al-Joubier in Washington, DC, Dr Seyed Hossein Mousavian at Princeton University, and Dr Ata’ollah Mohajerani in London, for sharing their personal historical experiences and offering insights to Saudi-Iranian relations that were simply not available in books alone. My appreciation and thanks go to Professor Fouad Ajami for receiving me into his sessions during the spring semester 2010 course “Arab Political Thought and Practice” at SAIS Johns Hopkins University, which I found intellectually informative and stimulating; the lively discussion sessions were most enjoyable and beneficial. The 7th floor crowd at Clement House are all worthy of praise and gratitude for allowing me to hold forth on my subject, either supporting me or shooting me down in flames as required on many occasions. Special thanks must go to my closest supporters and protagonists Manuel Almeida, Gregorio Bettiza, Filippo Dionigi, Rebecca Freedman and Kevork Oskanian. I have no words to thank Mrs. Jan Singfield, my personal assistant, whom I am proud to call my friend. Over the past few years, she has assisted me in organizing my interviews and travels, and always made sure I put the thesis before other commitments. For these things—and much more—I will always be grateful. Finally, I would like to thank Ms. Jenna Marangoni, who helped proofread the final version and often provided valuble suggestions while I was revising this disseration for submission. To everyone, I am truly grateful. 6 FRONT MATTER Note on Translation and Transliteration Where possible, I have used the translation and transliteration style of the British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies.1 This incorporates the transliteration style of the International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies.2 Defintions for Arabic and Persian terms have been provided with reference to the Oxford Dictionary of Islam.3 Any translated material within the text was translated by the source cited, except as otherwise noted. Ahl al-hal wal-‘aqd Those qualified to elect or depose a caliph on behalf of the Muslim community. In medieval political theory, the term refers to legal scholars whose task it was to offer the caliphate to the most qualified person. (lit. those who solve and bind) as-salaf as-salih Usually used in the sense of “pious ancestors,” especially the first three generations of the Muslim community, who are considered to have lived the normative experience of Islam. Often referred to in works by Hanbali jurists, particularly Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. (lit. ancestors) bay’ah An oath of allegiance to a leader; an unwritten pact between the subjects by leading members of the tribe with the understanding that, as long as the leader abides by certain responsibilities toward his subjects, they are to maintain their allegiance to him. da’wa The teaching of Islam. (lit. propagation) diyana (lit. theological knowledge) fatwā Legal ruling on Islamic law by an Islamic scholar. faqīh (pl. fuqahā’) An expert in Islamic law; a jurist. Iraniyat Iranian Nationalism. Al-Islamiyyun Islamists. A term used to describe an Islamic political or social activist. Coined in preference to the more common term “Islamic fundamentalist”. Islamists are committed to implementation of their ideological vision of Islam in the state and/or society. Islamiyat Shi’a political Islam. ijtihād Independent reasoning through individual study of scripture. majlis Used to describe various types of special gatherings among common interest groups be it administrative, social or religious in countries with linguistic or cultural connections to Islam; the Iranian parliament. (lit. a place of sitting) Majlis al-Shūrā The Consultative Council Marja al-Taqlid The most learned of the Shi’a, literally means “religious reference” or “source to imitate”. 1 British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies; "Instructions for authors". Available at: < http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=cbjm20&page=instructions >. 2 International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies October 2010: "IJMES Translation and Transliteration Guide". Available at: < http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ijmes/pages/transliteration.html >. 3 Esposito 2003: Oxford Dictionary of Islam. 7 mostazafin The lower classes; the term also refers to those who are deprived of the opportunity to develop their full potential.

Load more