Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract  
Introduction
The concept of khurūj (rebellion) constitutes one of the central themes of Khwāja Niẓām al-Mulk’s Siyar al-Mulūk (Book of Politics), as evidenced by the fact that its longest chapters are devoted to the historical narration of rebellions and seditions (chapters 43–47). Khwāja employs the notions of khurūj/rebellion and fitna/sedition to encompass a wide range of uprisings and acts of defiance and, while emphasizing their significance, presents a detailed discussion of them as an act of counsel and goodwill toward the Seljuk state. His remarks suggest that rebellion, in his view, is a recurring phenomenon across time and space; the absence of uprisings in certain periods is attributed not to their impossibility but to the awe inspired by powerful rulers and the effectiveness of state institutions. Khwāja’s tendency to classify a broad spectrum of movements—including Sinbād the Infidel, the Mazdakites, the Khurramites, and various Shiʿi groups, particularly the Ismailis and the Qarmatians—within a single category raises an important question: what common feature did he perceive among these diverse movements, and what form of unity did he discern beneath their apparent diversity?
Methodology
To clarify Khwāja Niẓām al-Mulk’s understanding of rebellion, this study adopts a minimal hermeneutic approach in reading his historical text. This approach is based on the assumption of the author’s intellectual coherence, the presence of a unified underlying logic throughout the work, and the application of the principle of charity. In order to identify and explain the unity underlying diverse manifestations of rebellion, the analysis also draws on a metaphysical framework in the Aristotelian sense—namely, the search for an ultimate principle or final cause beneath multiplicity and variation. The objective is to determine what, in Khwāja’s view, lay behind the heterogeneous ideas and claims advanced by rebels and seditionists.
Findings and Discussion
The analysis indicates that Khwāja Niẓām al-Mulk clearly distinguishes between the cunning and manipulative leaders of rebellions and the masses who followed them. The largely ignorant populace tended to act as mere followers and was willing to comply with even the unreasonable demands of their leaders—including the abandonment of religious obligations—often motivated by the prospect of modest gains. By contrast, the leaders of rebellions and uprisings were typically intelligent and frequently drawn from elite circles. Khwāja’s remarks suggest that the primary causes of rebellion can be reduced to two main factors: first, the pursuit of power, wealth, and fame, accompanied by submission to personal desires and the instrumental use of religious beliefs to conceal genuine intentions; and second, the deception and misguidance of individuals holding erroneous beliefs.
Conclusion
This interpretation, however, gives rise to a fundamental paradox. If the emergence of every new belief or ideology—and the social and political transformations that follow—is attributed to such flawed and suspect motives, how should the founders of accepted religions and legitimate sects be understood? Moreover, does this perspective not risk legitimizing whichever religion happens to be endorsed by those in power as the true faith? To address this paradox, two possible explanations are proposed. The first emphasizes Khwāja’s political pragmatism, suggesting that he prioritizes considerations of political expediency without presupposing a single, coherent metaphysical framework, focusing instead on practical governance. The second points to the possibility of later textual interpolations, omissions, or alterations introduced by scribes after Khwāja’s death, shaped by the political and intellectual conditions of subsequent periods.

Abstract Introduction While it may seem that ancient thinkers didn't explicitly discuss the concept of security in isolation, the constant concern for security among humankind ensured it was addressed in their works, albeit using different terminology. For example, the authors of "Andarznameh" (political Books of Advice) were focused on preserving governance and kingship. This paper, through a case study of Siyar al-Muluk (also known as Siyasatnameh/Book of Politics) by Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk, aims to reconstruct the "logic of politics" as understood by these thinkers. By exploring their "intellectual world," we seek to show what meanings the themes associated with the contemporary concept of "security" could have held within their framework and worldview.   Methodology Analyzing the ideas in Siyar al-Muluk, it's clear that Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk identified three main pillars of security: the king (malik), the kingdom (mulk), and the realm (mamlakat). These three elements form an interconnected whole. The concept of justice (adl) for Khwaja wasn't just about modern-day fairness; it included this tripartite framework. Under this notion of justice, values like moderation, adherence to traditions, avoiding religious innovation, oversight of officials' performance, defending against enemy threats, and avoiding extravagance were crucial. Khwaja's idea of "good kingship" was a well-ordered system where everything had its place. In this system, all officials were chosen based on merit and capability, and the king would intervene if any deviation or misconduct was detected. This "ideal" state or "good times" was synonymous with a "just kingship," ensuring the well-being of the subjects and the prosperity of the world. Any departure from this justice was seen as a path to decline and downfall.   Discussion and Results From Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk's perspective, all forms of policymaking are intrinsically tied to security policymaking, as the ultimate goal is to preserve power, governance, and kingship. Security policymaking focused on preventing threats from emerging, neutralizing them in their early stages, and eliminating any actual and critical threats. It seems that Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk identified three main types of threats: 1) threats from foreign enemies and rival kings; 2) "hard" threats from internal enemies, which he often referred to as "Khawarij"; and 3) threats arising from "deviation from justice," or in modern terms, system malfunctions or dysfunctions. It seems that Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk devised strategies to counter each type of threat. For external threats, he emphasized the need for a ready army and the expenses for maintaining it, a well-stocked treasury, the king paying soldiers' salaries, keeping subjects content, and showcasing the Sultan's majesty and greatness. According to Khwaja, internal "hard" threats, like uprisings and rebellions, stemmed from the gradual growth of latent or invisible "soft" threats. These were often caused by the spread of false religions and bad beliefs, which laid the groundwork for rebellion and sedition against the government. To counter these threats, Khwaja recommended continuous examination of religious affairs, strengthening true religion, purging the government and bureaucracy of heretical influence, and combating the Khawarij and heretics. When it comes to the third aspect of security, maintaining "justice," he highlighted several necessities: fulfilling royal duties and establishing good governance, preserving and expanding desirable royal qualities, continuously overseeing officials' work and punishing misconduct, preventing multiple job holdings, avoiding delegation of authority without supervision, creating and maintaining a network of informants, ensuring subjects’ access to the Sultan, monitoring and supervising the army, and basing jobs and titles on merit.   Conclusion While the modern concept of security isn't explicitly outlined in Siyar al-Muluk, it serves as the cornerstone and unifying thread connecting the various aspects of Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk's intellectual framework. This perspective sheds new light on his intellectual world.

Abstract  
Introduction
Protracted or intractable ethnic conflicts are a type of clashes that, despite fluctuating levels of violence, seem to have no foreseeable resolution. An example of such a conflict is the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) crisis in Turkey. Despite its four-decade history and significant political and social impacts on the country, there appears to be no clear end in sight. The persistence of these conflicts not only jeopardizes the security of the conflict-ridden nation but also has a ripple effect on neighboring countries, draining their resources and hindering their development and prosperity. This paper aims to comprehend these enduring ethnic conflicts and analyze the factors and causes influencing them, using the PKK as a case study.
Methodology
When it comes to the causes of ethnic conflicts, there are numerous theories and models, but their universality and comprehensiveness are often questioned. For instance, Ted Robert Gurr proposed four categories: salience for ethnocultural identity, incentives for action, dynamics for protracted conflicts, and capacity for action, each with its own facets and dimensions. Another scholar, Stuart J. Kaufman, believes that the outbidding of ethnic elites and their manipulation of ethnic symbols play a significant role in inciting hostility against the government or other ethnic groups. Shiping Tang, on the other hand, considers the four master drivers: emotion, interest, capability, and opportunity. As for the prolongation of conflicts, James Samuel Coleman identifies four dimensions: the context of the conflict, the issues at stake, the relations among ethnic groups, and the processes, outcomes, and consequences of the conflict.
This paper proposes a model based on the philosophical principle that “the persistence of an effect is contingent on the persistence of its cause”. According to this model, the perpetuation of dissatisfaction or the emergence of new dissatisfaction (either through the ongoing framing of contentious issues or their reframing) results in the perpetuation of the cycle of violence and revenge. This situation is further exacerbated by the enduring presence of international supporters or the emergence of new backers. Concurrently, these conditions solidify the geopolitical factors that have played a role in initiating and perpetuating ethnic conflicts.
Result and Discussion
The PKK emerged during the radical period of the 1970s in Turkey. This group highlighted the need to secure the national and ethnic rights of the Kurds, in addition to addressing the underdevelopment of Kurdish regions. The initiation of armed conflict by this group provoked a strong governmental response, leading to forced displacement, the declaration of a state of emergency, and an escalation in violence. Consequently, a broader segment of Kurdish society was drawn into the conflict.
Despite the fulfillment of some Kurdish demands during Erdogan’s tenure, particularly in the early years, the PKK and affiliated groups introduced new demands and a fresh framework of issues and conflicts. This group maintains its financial resources by engaging in smuggling and a variety of illicit activities. It has gained international supporters, in part due to the rise of ISIS and the need for extra-regional powers to leverage the PKK forces in combating it. By establishing a monopoly over Kurdish representation and eliminating potential competitors, the group has managed to maintain its position in the political landscape of Kurdish society and Turkey. Meanwhile, the geopolitics of the Kurdish regions remain relatively unchanged. On the other hand, the limited control exerted by Turkey’s neighbors over the country’s southern borders has not impeded border crossings, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the Turkish forces’ military pursuit of the PKK group.