• No se han encontrado resultados

− INSTALACIÓN

In document Big Blue 500 PT Big Blue 600 X (página 19-28)

111 Introduction

The simple meaning of the security in the region is the integrity of the region from internal

and external threats, but this meaning differs in this region as the GCC states demonstrate

recourse to foreign great powers to ward-off internal and external threats. Furthermore, these

foreign great powers are amongst the threats in the Gulf region, which have tightened the grip

of these powers on the whole region (Suwaidi. and others 2008).

This chapter addresses five primary sections: the first main section of the chapter

relates to the end of the two superpowers equation with its implications in the Gulf. In

addition, the demise of the Soviet Union and its effect on the Gulf is explored specifically.

This section also includes an overview of the New World Order. Security in the Gulf reveals

links to the New World Order, and its sustainability and effectiveness in the 1990s. In that

time, the Gulf was affected by bipolarity, which is shown in the US policy of containment

applied against Iraq and Iran, confrontation with the Soviet Union, and other manifestations

of the superpower rivalry (Hubble 1998 p. 1-2). The second main section explores the Second

Gulf War in 1991, and the accompanying intervention and deployment of international forces

in the Gulf. It reflects upon the Arab reaction to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and the effect

of the Second Gulf War on Iraq. The third main section of this chapter addresses the

implications of the events of 9/11 on the Gulf, and discusses several related topics, such as

the sources of threats, whether internal or external, and the development of the sources of

threats with special regard to the war on terror, particularly in the Gulf. The fourth main

section discusses the invasion of Iraq and the use of force to protect US interests, which

involves a discussion of the US justifications of war, and the progress of the war. The fifth

112

addresses the instability situation in the Gulf after the US invasion of Iraq, which provided a

new security environment that all the states in the region have had to deal with since 2003.

This chapter addresses and examines the international and regional events that have

affected security in the Gulf using the historical method and by employing a theoretical

framework based on the HST, as outlined in chapter one. The international power has a direct

impact on the security and the stability in the Gulf, which is necessary to study and analyse

the demise of bipolarity and the Soviet Union and all this led to the emergence of the new

world order in 1990. In addition, the HST is intensively employed in the following sections.

That the US and through its hegemony over the Gulf, particularly after the second Gulf War

in 1990 and the invasion of Iraq in 2003, acquired dominance and controlled the region to

play a substantial role in the conflicts of the region.

The demise of bipolarity and its implications internationally and in the Gulf

The role of the hegemonic state determined by factors of power of the state on the regional

and international levels (Pedersen 2002 p. 681). These factors are economic, political and

military, and if there is any change in these factors, the power of the state and its role will

change. This will affect its international and regional objectives and strategy. Whenever there

is any change in the capacity component of this force it will change depending on the size of

the power of the state and its role and effectiveness in influencing the events. Power relations

are clear in every society, as well as in the relations of states among themselves and each

other, every state has objectives and strategies which it seeks to achieve regionally and

internationally, and even internally. This requires the availability of certain elements of force,

so the state can achieve what it aspires to (Buzan and Waever 2003).

The different impacts of the international system on global stability created diverse

113

seen as a unipolar system, which is much more likely to achieve international stability, where

the presence of one pole in the international system ensures stability, due to its dominant

force. Furthermore, (Wohlforth 1999 p. 23) pointed out that:

“Unipolarity favours the absence of war among the great powers and comparatively low levels of competition for prestige or security for two reasons: the leading state’s power advantage removes the problem of hegemonic rivalry from world politics, and it reduces the salience and stakes of balance-of-power politics among the major states. This argument is based on two well-known realist theories: hegemonic theory and balance-of-power theory. Each is controversial, and he relationship between the two is complex. For the purposes of this analysis, however, the key point is that both theories predict that a unipolar system will be peaceful”.

Another trend considers that a bipolar system provides global stability, because it is

characterised by the dominance of two superpowers. Thus, any change in the balance of

power from any power will not significantly affect the stability of the international system,

because each of these superpowers will develop their military capability to deal with changes

in the balance of power (Waltz 1964).

A third trend asserts that multi-polarity provides an environment for interaction

between countries, which helps them achieve their goals without resorting to war. In addition,

in a multi-polar system, neutral forces may play a role in resolving international conflicts.

Furthermore, the ability of small and medium-sized countries to have independent

movements in the international system increases whenever there is greater multiplicity of

poles (Rosecrance 1966). Indeed, whenever conflict increases between large countries

114

the international system is. In contrast, polar unilateralism limits the ability of states to move

independently, as they are compelled to agree in policy with this single dominant pole (Scott

and et al 2009).

This is similar to the situation in the Gulf with the US position as the dominant power

and acting hegemonic state in this region. On the other hand, the Gulf states have to react to

the hegemony of the USA as the single dominant pole particularly in the Gulf (Senior official

interview No 3).

In document Big Blue 500 PT Big Blue 600 X (página 19-28)