|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
190892
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper analyses how Maldives’ close ties with Saudi Arabia have affected its relations with other countries from Middle East Asia. Following the footsteps of Saudi Arabia, Maldives severed its diplomatic relations with Iran in 2016 and with Qatar in 2017. The paper discusses the economic investments Riyadh has made to develop civic infrastructure in the island nation. However, more than diplomatic ties and economic investments, close relations between Malé and Riyadh have affected the Island state’s society. There is a spread of religious obstructionism in Maldivian society, for which several outside scholars and Maldivians blame Saudi Arabia. Finally, the paper briefly discusses Maldives’ ties with Middle East countries other than Saudi Arabia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
190891
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
India’s conception of its peaceful role in international affairs, which evolved during the Nehruvian era, is not an end in itself, but rather a wholesome strategic choice consistent with its economic development and great power ambitions. Despite emphasising a radical shift in foreign policy, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi deemed it essential to prioritise peace in international relations, particularly with the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. The Abraham Accords, involving the UAE and Bahrain, have created a new geopolitical environment that affirms India’s conception of security through peace and permits engagement in key areas while ensuring economic gains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
190896
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Middle East and South Asia can be defined as interlinked political spaces that experience deepening interactions of their energetic and ambitious regional powers together with the constant strategic competition of major global powers. This vibrancy has been relentlessly fuelled by the geo-economic/political/strategic, and humanitarian needs of these two regions’ actors. Since there are no regional groupings effectively representing the two regions these interactions are mostly minilateral or bilateral and are bolstered by historical, cultural and religious affinities. Yet, due to the relatively higher power status of the Middle East, these transregional interactions operate on an asymmetrical basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
190889
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The politico-economically uneven structure, fragile inter-state affairs and weak regionalism of the Middle East make it difficult to explain its interactions with South Asia within a single theoretical pattern. Neither interregionalism nor multilateralism could illuminate these interactions individually. This study merges recently popularized interaction schemes of minilateralism and bilateralism on a transregional basis to provide an eclectic and flexible conceptual framework to explain the patterns of Middle East–South Asia inter-state affairs. It argues that regardless of its weak regionalism and intra-regional power games, the Middle East, with these trendy interaction schemes, could still develop effective inter-state relations with South Asia. The study utilizes the empirical analysis method to interpret various levels and types of interactions between actors of various capabilities. In addition, it also uses case studies to produce a deeper context-dependent knowledge of Middle Eastern – South Asian actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
190894
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The emerging geopolitical tension and the trade competition in the Indian Ocean urge Sri Lanka to plan its diplomatic ties prudently encouraging Sri Lankan decision-makers to envisage a new strategy for international diplomatic cooperation: minilateralism. This diplomatic engagement mode enables smaller states to cooperate with greater powers in small-scaled/sized cooperation patterns to increase their international opportunities. Since the Indian Ocean has become a hotspot of maritime trade competition and various geostrategic developments, Sri Lanka aspires to new venues for international cooperation. The ‘new Quad’ formed among the United States, India, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates can be a potentially lucrative partnership for a littoral state like Sri Lanka. Amid these developments, this paper seeks to fill a void by delving into the strategic reasons for Sri Lanka’s engagement with the Middle East via minilateralism. This paper investigates the newly strategising affairs of the ‘new Quad’ which two of their member states, Israel and UAE are from the Middle East, and views on how Sri Lanka can benefit in economic ties and crisis management realms to deal with energy and maritime trade issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
190893
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As a new nation-state in 1947, Pakistan’s relations with the larger Arab world were fraught with many tensions and contradictions. Ever since, many readjustments have taken place on both sides. These rearrangements derive from such tectonic shifts as the ebbing away of Arab nationalism 1967 onwards, petro-dollar rush in the 1970s, Iranian revolution in 1979, end of Third worldism, Afghan war, unipolarity post–Berlin Wall, 9/11 besides labour migrations, military alliances and domestic imperatives of various states and polities. Presently, Pakistan is tied to the Middle East in a three-pronged manner. Economically, it is dependent on petro-dollar rich Gulf Sheikhdoms. This relationship can be described as pure clientelism. Next, geographical proximity and Cold War compulsions have implied an unavoidable Iranian nexus. Finally, with the rather recent rise of Turkey as a subimperial power in the Middle East, Pakistan has also tilted towards Turkey of late. However, beyond geopolitics and economy, Pakistan’s embrace of the larger Muslim world has ideological connotations as well. Imagined as a Muslim Zion, commissars at the helm of ideological state apparatuses in Pakistan have always imagined Pakistan as an integral part of the larger Muslim community, numerous contradictions notwithstanding. Hence, informed by the theories of clientelism and subimperialism, this study argues that Pakistan’s relations with the Middle East are anchored in economics, geopolitics and identity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
190890
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Taliban 2.0 have made overtures to states across different regions to seek international recognition. In a departure from their past isolationist foreign policy practices, I argue the Taliban have expediently, yet uncharacteristically, pursued these initiatives in a spirit of “pragmatism.” The modus vivendi they have reached with Iran demonstrates the Taliban’s unprecedented prioritization of pragmatism over ideology. I draw upon Machiavellian pragmatism in International Relations theory to examine the shift in the Taliban’s political posture through the lens of Iran–Afghanistan relations in three crucial episodes: the Taliban’s rule over Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, the post-9/11 Afghanistan, and the resurgence of the Taliban since August 2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
190895
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This commentary discusses Bangladesh’s interactions with Middle East countries, particularly focusing on the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and Turkey. Although Bangladesh’s relations with the GCC are seemingly and dominantly economic, there is a significant level of cultural interconnectedness as well, especially with Saudi Arabia. In Bangladesh–Turkey relations, there is also a similar type of cultural attachment operating via each country’s religious identities. This attachment, especially in the last decade, was bolstered by deepening cooperation in counterterrorism activities and further economic interactions. The interactions with these Middle Eastern countries are not only important to Bangladesh’s foreign policy and economy but also to assuage some domestic tensions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|