Quarterly Journal of West Asia Political Research

Abstract The US-Israeli war against Iran has exposed the vulnerabilities of the security arrangements in the Persian Gulf and the limitations arising from the Arab states’ military and security dependence on the United States. The central research problem concerns the continued security dependence of the Arab Gulf states on external powers and its implications for national sovereignty, regional stability, and the quality of governance. The main objective of this study is to examine the implications of the aforementioned war for redefining the Arab states’ security relations with the United States and to explain the need for establishing an inclusive regional security system. The main research question is: How can the US-Israeli war against Iran affect the security orientations of the Arab Gulf states, and what mechanism is more appropriate for ensuring sustainable regional security? Employing a qualitative method and a descriptive-analytical approach, the study draws on the historical analysis of security relations, an examination of geopolitical developments, and documentary analysis of academic sources and institutional reports. The findings indicate that unilateral reliance on US security guarantees limits the strategic autonomy of the Arab states without necessarily ensuring sustainable security. Furthermore, the continuation of the conflict, its economic and human costs, and disruptions to maritime traffic have increased the need to reconsider existing security arrangements. Consequently, the article considers the establishment of a regional security mechanism involving Iran, the member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and other relevant stakeholders, based on respect for national sovereignty, non-intervention, and institutional cooperation, as a potential means of strengthening regional peace and stability.

Abstract This study aims to identify and explain the challenges facing civil society activism in Saudi Arabia based on Anthony Giddens’s structuration theory. The central research question concerns how the country’s political, legal, administrative, and cultural structures shape the scope of action available to civil society organizations and actors, and what capacities and strategies these actors employ in response to such constraints. In terms of its purpose, the study is explanatory-analytical, while methodologically it adopts a qualitative approach. Data were collected through documentary analysis and a review of scholarly articles, books, official documents, and relevant reports on civil society in Saudi Arabia. The data were analyzed using theory-driven thematic analysis. The findings indicate that licensing requirements, administrative oversight, the financial and organizational dependence of civil society organizations, restrictions on independent activities, control over public and digital spaces, and sensitivity toward political advocacy constitute the major barriers to civil society activism in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, a significant proportion of civil society activities has been confined to charitable, educational, cultural, and social service domains. Nevertheless, civil society actors have created opportunities for sustaining their activities and achieving gradual influence through informal networks, trust-based relationships, voluntary initiatives, digital media, and the opportunities emerging from ongoing social reforms. From a Giddensian perspective, structures are not merely constraining forces; they also provide actors with rules and resources that enable action. Accordingly, civil society activism in Saudi Arabia is neither entirely autonomous nor completely passive; rather, it is shaped through an ongoing process of adaptation, negotiation, and reinterpretation of structural constraints.

Abstract The 1921 Cairo Conference represented a major turning point in the reconfiguration of British regional policy in West Asia following the First World War. The emergence of a new regional order in West Asia after the war marked the beginning of a series of transformations that also affected Iran’s geopolitical position within its surrounding environment. Britain’s decisions, aimed at reformulating its regional policy and aligning it with a broader strategy for managing the emerging regional order at lower imperial costs, played a significant role in reshaping the political and security structures of West Asia. This article analyzes the process of power engineering undertaken by Britain within Iran’s geopolitical environment and seeks to explain the logic of indirect rule that has shaped the region over the past century. The primary objective of this study is to examine how the decisions and policy orientations consolidated during this period, within the framework of Britain’s broader strategy in West Asia, contributed to redefining Iran’s geopolitical position. The study employs an analytical approach based on archival sources. The findings indicate that, during this period, Britain, seeking to reduce the costs of imperial governance while consolidating its influence, pursued a transition from direct to indirect rule, the establishment of politically aligned entities, and reliance on air power as an instrument of control and power projection. These developments not only contributed to the creation of new political structures in the region but also transformed the security balances surrounding Iran and reconfigured Iran’s geopolitical position within Britain’s regional strategy.

Abstract Over the past half-century, during which the United States has assumed a leading role in the international system, U.S. officials have consistently invoked the rhetoric of promoting democracy, human rights, liberal values, and the free world. On this basis, they have even intervened in the internal affairs of countries around the world. The most recent examples of such actions occurred in Venezuela and Iran in 2026. The present study aims to assess the extent to which the United States is sincere in making such claims. The central research question is: Why does the United States retreat from its proclaimed principles and commitments whenever its national interests are at stake? The study hypothesizes that the United States is not genuinely consistent in its human rights claims and, when faced with a choice between interests and values, prioritizes the former over the latter. To address the research question, the study employs a qualitative, descriptive-analytical approach, with data collected through library-based research. Using an evidentiary approach to substantiating its claims, the article examines Egypt as a case study. The findings indicate that this contradiction is not confined to Egypt or the events that unfolded there; it was also evident in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain, and Yemen during the Arab Spring. In none of these countries did the United States allow a transfer of political power following the events of 2011; instead, it continued to support authoritarian and autocratic regimes. U.S. policymakers appear unable either to abandon their professed ideals and values or to relinquish their immediate national interests. Consequently, while continuing to emphasize human rights and democratic values, whenever and wherever these values come into conflict with U.S. interests, the latter take precedence.

Abstract Eighty years after the establishment of the United Nations, the world order has undergone fundamental transformations. This study examines the transition from a Western-centered hegemonic structure toward a multipolar order, with particular attention to the role of resistance movements and actors. It seeks to answer the central question of how the balance of power within the United Nations has shifted from unilateral dominance toward collective agency and a discourse of resistance. The study employs a qualitative research approach based on discourse analysis and an examination of international documents, including resolutions, General Assembly statements, and Security Council reports, covering the period from 2000 to 2025. The findings indicate that the emergence of rising powers, the declining effectiveness of veto mechanisms, and the increasing voice of countries from the Global South have contributed to the emergence of resistance dynamics against the Western-led liberal order. These developments have transformed multilateralism from a normative aspiration into a more operational reality on the United Nations agenda, although this transformation has been accompanied by structural tensions and ongoing contestation over the meaning and scope of national sovereignty. Ultimately, the article argues that, as the United Nations approaches its ninth decade, it faces an increasing need to reconsider the foundations of its legitimacy, representativeness, and effectiveness in light of the emergence of a multipolar order and evolving dynamics of resistance.

Abstract Power dynamics among China, India, and Pakistan constitute a central factor in shaping the regional balance of power in South Asia. The strengthening of the China–Pakistan strategic partnership through the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and cooperation within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) has intensified India’s strategic concerns and broader geopolitical competition. These developments have affected regional security and stability while also influencing trade, energy connectivity, and the distribution of geopolitical influence. The central question of this study is how the SCO, as a strategic platform, has strengthened China–Pakistan cooperation and affected U.S.–China competition, India’s security concerns, and regional stability in South Asia. The study hypothesizes that enhanced China–Pakistan cooperation through the SCO and CPEC has influenced the regional balance of power by increasing Pakistan’s economic dependence on China, relatively reducing U.S. influence, and intensifying India’s strategic concerns. The study aims to examine the role of power dynamics in shaping and transforming strategic relations among China, India, and Pakistan, with particular emphasis on their economic, military, and geopolitical interactions. Methodologically, the research adopts a descriptive-analytical approach and employs Strategic Triangle Theory as its theoretical framework. The findings indicate that strengthened China–Pakistan cooperation through CPEC and the SCO has contributed to changes in the regional balance of power and increased India’s strategic concerns. In response, India has expanded its strategic and military cooperation and strengthened its defense capabilities. Consequently, these dynamics have contributed to intensified strategic, arms, and nuclear competition in South Asia and reinforced the region’s security dilemma.