The foreign policy of many states in the Middle East recently shows a tendency towards Western orientation. Since the monarchies of the region, like the Gulf monarchies or Jordan, have more in common with Western states than with radical Arab states, their foreign policy relations have always been more Western-orientated than those of other states in the Middle East. However, even some of the non-monarchical states, such as Syria, now pursue a policy of openness to the rest of the world. This leads to a similar Western-orientation in Syria and Jordan which is caused by various national patterns.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Impact of Subset National Patterns on Syria's and Jordan's Contemporary Foreign Policy
2.1 The Political System
2.1.1 Categorization of Political Systems in the Middle East
2.1.2 Syria
2.1.3 Jordan
2.2 The Economy
2.2.1 Economic Features of the Middle East
2.2.2 Syria
2.2.3 Jordan
2.3 The (Civil) Society
2.3.1 Syria
2.3.2 Jordan
3. Conclusion
4. Bibliography
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper aims to analyze how specific national patterns—namely the political system, the economy, and the (civil) society—influence and shape the contemporary foreign policy of Syria and Jordan. By employing a synchronous comparison, the research explores why these two states, despite sharing a general trend towards Western-oriented foreign policy, diverge in their strategic outcomes due to internal structural differences.
- Comparative analysis of political systems (bureaucratic-authoritarian vs. traditional-authoritarian).
- Examination of economic structures and their impact on aid-dependency and foreign relations.
- Assessment of (civil) society's role and its influence on government decision-making.
- Evaluation of internal regime stability and legitimacy as determinants of international alignment.
- Investigation into how national characteristics compel states to balance domestic interests against external pressures.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1.2 Syria
Syria is a neo-patrimonial, personalized, highly centralized presidential republic (Perthes 2004: 87f) that emerged from a military coup by the Ba'th party in 1963 (Sottimano/Selvik 2009: 7). According to Schlumberger's categorization, Syria is a bureaucratic-authoritarian system (Schlumberger 2002: 10, figure 1). Like all neo-patrimonial systems, the Syrian regime consists of three circles: the inner circle, or core elite, the second circle and the third, or outer, circle. In the inner circle, domestic and foreign policy decisions are made and the members owe their position and influence to the president. The today's inner circle is formed by the President, his Vice president, the Prime minister, the foreign minister, the defense minister, the chief of the military intelligence, the deputy general-secretary of the Ba'th party leadership, the interior minister, the head of the General Intelligence, and the head of the General Intelligence domestic affairs department.
The second circle consists of other cabinet members and advisors to the president, as well as leading military and security officers. Although they make no strategic decisions, they are still influential. The third circle are the less influential elite members with indirect influence over decisions, agenda setting or discourse, namely assistant ministers, provincial governors, heads of the Ba'th party's provincial branches and some high functionaries directly appointed by the president (cf. Perthes 2004: 90f).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the foreign policy shift towards the West in the Middle East and outlines the comparative approach regarding the national characteristics of Syria and Jordan.
2. The Impact of Subset National Patterns on Syria's and Jordan's Contemporary Foreign Policy: This central chapter analyzes how political systems, economic conditions, and civil society impact the foreign policy decisions of both countries.
2.1 The Political System: This section compares Syria's bureaucratic-authoritarian model with Jordan's traditional-authoritarian monarchy and their respective decision-making processes.
2.1.1 Categorization of Political Systems in the Middle East: Provides the theoretical framework for classifying regional political systems, specifically focusing on the approach of Oliver Schlumberger.
2.1.2 Syria: Describes the structure of the Syrian regime, focusing on the neo-patrimonial three-circle model and the influence of the old guard on the presidency.
2.1.3 Jordan: Explains how the Hashemite monarchy derives legitimacy and concentrates executive power, allowing for strategic foreign policy independence.
2.2 The Economy: Examines how economic reliance on oil, remittances, and foreign aid influences state behavior and alignment.
2.2.1 Economic Features of the Middle East: Discusses the significance of oil resources and external rent in defining the economic landscape of the region.
2.2.2 Syria: Details the economic challenges following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent push for limited liberalization and EU integration.
2.2.3 Jordan: Analyzes Jordan's economic crisis, its dependency on foreign aid, and the strategic pursuit of free-trade agreements to foster recovery.
2.3 The (Civil) Society: Investigates the ethnic and social composition of both states and the extent to which public opinion and civil society constrain political regimes.
2.3.1 Syria: Highlights the heterogeneity of Syrian society and the regime's use of controlled opening and repressive measures to maintain stability.
2.3.2 Jordan: Describes the homogenization of Jordanian society through the lens of the "Palestinian Question" and the state's tight control over political discourse.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, highlighting that while both nations seek stronger ties with the West, their specific national patterns create different constraints and outcomes.
4. Bibliography: Lists the academic sources, journals, and primary internet data utilized in the study.
Keywords
Foreign policy, Syria, Jordan, political system, Middle East, bureaucratic-authoritarian, monarchy, rentier state, Western orientation, Bashar al-Asad, King Abdullah II, civil society, economic reform, national patterns, geopolitical stability.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper examines the impact of internal national patterns—political systems, economies, and civil societies—on the contemporary foreign policy of Syria and Jordan.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The research covers political science theory regarding regime classification, comparative political economy, and the role of civil society in authoritarian states.
What is the central research question?
The research asks how distinct national characteristics influence foreign policy outcomes and explain why these two countries, despite similarities in their Western-leaning tendencies, approach foreign relations differently.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author employs a synchronous comparison, analyzing subset national patterns in both states to demonstrate their influence on foreign policy and comparing the degree of that influence.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body breaks down the regimes into political, economic, and social dimensions, analyzing specific case studies like Syria's power transition under Bashar al-Asad and Jordan's economic reliance on the U.S.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include foreign policy, Middle East, political systems, authoritarianism, rentier states, and economic integration.
How does the Syrian political system differ from the Jordanian one in this analysis?
Syria is categorized as a bureaucratic-authoritarian presidential republic where the president must navigate the influence of an "old guard," while Jordan is a traditional-authoritarian monarchy where the King holds the ultimate, centralized power to make strategic decisions.
What role does the "old guard" play in the foreign policy of Syria?
The "old guard" acts as a significant constraint, as Bashar al-Asad often has to rely on the loyalties and support networks established by his father, which can sometimes block his preferred foreign policy reforms.
Why is economic dependency a crucial factor for Jordan's foreign policy?
Due to its high foreign debt and lack of oil resources, Jordan is heavily dependent on international aid, particularly from the U.S., which forces the government to align its foreign policy with the interests of its creditors.
Does civil society effectively influence the foreign policy in these two countries?
In both cases, civil society's impact is limited; while the regimes monitor public opinion to ensure stability, they use legal and repressive measures to prevent civil society from dictating the direction of foreign policy.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Anna Fuchs (Autor:in), 2010, The Impact of National Patterns on Foreign Policy in Syria and Jordan, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/211617
