Middle East Arms Control and Regional Security Dilemmas

2014 ◽  
pp. 211-220
2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-77 ◽  
Author(s):  

AbstractOver the past decade former, and sometimes current, adversaries in the Middle East increasingly have been engaged in unofficial multilateral regional security dialogues, a form of track two diplomacy. Despite the proliferation of such dialogues, we know very little about them. This article reviews the nature and content of a variety of track two security dialogues among Arabs and Israelis and evaluates the impact of such activities. What have such dialogues accomplished to date, and what are their limitations? By what standards should we measure success and failure? How can such dialogues be improved in the Middle East and other conflictual regions? The article suggests that those who expect track two to lead to major policy shifts in track one (the official negotiating process) will be disappointed and perceive such dialogues as a failure. However, if we evaluate track two based on what the process itself produces, both in terms of changing regional perceptions among its participants and impacting regional security policy in an incremental fashion, we are more likely to see its value. In this sense, the research supports arguments made by other students of negotiation who suggest that outcomes are not always the sole objective or the appropriate measure of success for international negotiations; the negotiation process itself also has value. Despite problems and limitations, track two diplomacy has proved an important mechanism in building regional understanding and knowledge in the arms control and regional security realm. Such diplomacy could also be applied to other issues and regions during the lengthy process of building peace among adversaries.


2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 487-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald Steinberg

AbstractThe history of arms control efforts in the Middle East consists of numerous initiatives, but very limited results. From the first efforts to negotiate WMD limits and non-proliferation arrangements in the 1960s, through various regional initiatives, frameworks, proposals, discussions, and negotiations, the obstacles to agreement on mutual limitations remained dominant. Frequent discussions in the UN of a Middle East Nuclear Free Zone (MENWFZ), the multi-lateral Arms Control and Regional Security (ACRS) talks initiated during the 1991 Middle East Peace Conference, and the regional dimensions of global frameworks such as the NPT, CWC, and CTBT have all failed to produce results.Detailed analysis of these efforts highlights the impact of realist security-based factors, the structure and process of the interactions, as well as the cultural and domestic political dimensions. The existential conflicts, reflected in protracted territorial disputes and denials of legitimacy and compounded by a fundamental asymmetry, created a zero-sum framework in the region. The region is characterized by a great deal of instability and competition; this situation, in turn, contributed to the efforts to acquire WMD. In terms of domestic politics, the regional cooperation required for arms limitation is often inconsistent with the dominant articulated political interests and regime perspectives. In addition, misunderstandings and misperceptions frequently occur due to the complexities of cross-cultural communications in the Middle East. Numerous dialogues have not narrowed the gaps or transformed the zero-sum frameworks into cooperative ones. Hopes for the creation of successful regional mechanisms for limiting arms depend on overcoming the obstacles encountered in past efforts.


Author(s):  
Egle Murauskaite

Following the Middle East Peace Conference in Madrid in 1991, the Arms Control and Regional Security (ACRS) working group was launched as the first and so far only official regional arms control negotiations. While there have been multiple attempts to distil the lessons of the ACRS process, the aspect of events most conducive to forging trust between the negotiators and their inter-personal dynamics has never been explored. This paper takes an inter-disciplinary approach to studying negotiations: it zooms in on the ACRS process, integrating Middle East studies, decision making processes and nonproliferation literature with negotiations theory and oral history techniques, in the first attempt at a more comprehensive methodology to one of the highlights in the modern Middle Eastern diplomacy. To convey the multiple vantage points of participants, a three-stage methodological process is discussed: individual interviews with negotiating team members and facilitators, followed by group interviews of national delegations, and finally, a group session with representatives from each delegation. Ultimately, this model helps preserve a more accurate historical account, and significantly complements the technical insights on the negotiation dynamics with unexpected inter-personal relations angles, assisting in the design of more promising future frameworks.


Survival ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald M. Steinberg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document