TITLE:
Iranian and Saudi Cultural and Religious Identities: Constructivist Perspective
AUTHORS:
Shokrollah Kamari Majin
KEYWORDS:
Iran; Saudi Arabia, Competitive Relationship, Islam, the Middle East, National Identity
JOURNAL NAME:
Open Journal of Political Science,
Vol.7 No.1,
December
15,
2016
ABSTRACT: National identity in a society is something that society tries to define, develop, and preserve. If we don’t believe that human nature is based on war, violence and hostility, we could argue that no nation could be enemies with another nation. Mahatma Gandhi once said if children “grow up in their natural innocence, we won’t have to struggle, we won’t have to pass fruitless idle resolutions” (Gandhi, 1931: p. 361). However, events in the Middle East region in the last three decades, and especially in recent years, show us that Iran and Saudi Arabia have stood face to face, as two archenemies. The relationship between the two countries has reached the point where both countries view “themselves as serious rivals” (Terril, 2011: p. 1). But are these two countries really two hostile national identities, or are they two rival states who have expanded their rivalry to include cultural and religious areas? It could be said that both Iran’s and Saudi Arabia’s political identities are currently under severe pressure. Neither of these states can easily continue their attitudes and behaviors in regards to international relations. However, “both sides are not interested in compromising and resolving them in a peaceful way” (Bar-Tal in Mabon, 2013: p. 109). The Shi’a-Sunni religious conflict is the main dispute between these two states, and is intertwined with many stories, narratives, exaggerations and distortion of the realities. Focusing on the relationship between the Iranian and Saudi states, with particular attention being paid to their perceptions of each other, is an appropriate way to understand both states’ behaviors. The question is whether these two states have grasped that they cannot continue with this kind of political adventurism. They may finally choose between the two opportunities and either give up fueling tensions in the region before the conflict reaches a no-return point, or continue to provoke cultural and religious conflicts in the region in order to overcome their internal legitimacy challenges.