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.
population-scarce countries, which was instrumentally used to create regionalalignments by rewarding and punishing oil-poor/labour-abundant countries (Fargues et al. , 2015 ). Egypt's receipt of remittances from the GCC is a case in point that is discussed in more detail in the following subsections.
Intergovernmental aid and credit: a typical example would be the post-1990 reconstruction of Lebanon after fifteen years of civil war (Corm, 1998 ; Daher, 2016 ). Another example is the readmittance of Egypt into the Arab League within the same
By the end of the 1990s, the various forces driving individual states’ secu195
Institutions of security governance
rity calculations had led to discernible regionalalignments among selected
CIS members. Surveying the constellation of FSU states, with their varying
degrees of commitment and involvement in the CIS, we find that essentially
two groupings of states emerged. The first, a seemingly ‘pro-Moscow’ grouping, and including Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan, encompassed states which had
employment as lecturers and
professors at university colleges in Rangoon, Ceylon and
Singapore. 51 The
territories of British rule around the Indian Ocean thus offered
Indian scholars opportunities for employment and advancement,
creating new regionalalignments of intellectual and institutional
power that ran parallel to those of the British academic world
the Regional Authorities established in 1994. The waste regionalalignment for waste was based on political boundaries non-aligned to the Regional Authorities and/or other regional structures.
From 1996 to 1999 regionalisation was encouraged but: ‘No one sat down and gave instructions on whom to include or exclude in regional groupings. The Act itself gave the Minister power to take decisions on this and issue instructions but this was not done. The Waste Management Planning Regulations in 1997 contained what the content of a plan should be