Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract Introduction Tension and rivalry have been enduring features of relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia. Despite numerous diplomatic initiatives aimed at reducing bilateral frictions, efforts to establish a stable and cooperative relationship have achieved only limited success. Consequently, various forms of political and strategic conflict have characterized relations between the two states over the past forty-five years. Against this backdrop, this article seeks to identify and analyze the underlying causes of this persistent tension through a comprehensive, multi-layered analytical framework. The study addresses the following research question: What factors contribute to the persistence and escalation of tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia, and how do these factors operate? To answer this question, the article employs the conceptual and methodological framework of Causal Layered Analysis (CLA), examining the roots of bilateral tensions across four interconnected levels: the litany level, the systemic level, the discourse and worldview level, and the metaphor and myth level. Given the exploratory nature of CLA, the study does not advance a formal hypothesis. The analysis covers the period from 1979 to 2024. Methodology This study examines the factors contributing to tensions in Iran–Saudi relations through the application of Causal Layered Analysis (CLA), a futures-oriented methodology developed by Sohail Inayatullah. CLA is designed to uncover the deeper causes and underlying structures of complex issues and is particularly useful for understanding multidimensional phenomena that cannot be adequately explained through surface-level analysis alone. Within this framework, the primary focus is on identifying and explaining the main drivers of existing tensions. Given the large number of variables that may shape future developments, the potential future consequences of these tensions fall beyond the scope of the study. The framework operates through four analytical layers. The first, the litany level, focuses on observable events, political actions, policy positions, and broader trends that shape tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The second level examines systemic causes, including political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and historical factors. In this study, particular attention is given to political and security dynamics at the domestic, regional, and international levels, as well as the broader historical and social conditions that influence bilateral relations. The third layer explores the discourses and worldviews that sustain and legitimize existing tensions. This includes an examination of dominant ideologies, competing narratives, and the interests and values of the principal actors involved. The fourth and deepest layer focuses on myths and metaphors, encompassing the collective stories, symbols, and often subconscious assumptions that shape political perceptions and behavior. At this level, the study investigates widely held myths and metaphors within both societies and assesses their role in shaping the worldviews that influence relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Findings and Discussion The findings suggest that tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia are sustained by multiple factors operating across different analytical layers. At the litany level, the rhetoric, policies, and actions of political leaders in both countries reflect and reinforce fluctuations in bilateral tensions over time. At the systemic level, differences in political and economic systems, geopolitical competition, and contrasting approaches to regional and international order emerge as major sources of conflict. Saudi Arabia’s conservative monarchical system and its strategic partnership with the United States stand in sharp contrast to the revolutionary identity of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its opposition to Western—particularly American—influence. These fundamental differences have produced divergent political orientations and patterns of international engagement, thereby contributing to persistent bilateral disagreements. In addition, limited economic interdependence, weak commercial ties, and the absence of significant economic complementarity have constrained opportunities for cooperation that might otherwise mitigate tensions. Regional competition for influence, leadership, and strategic prominence in the Middle East further intensifies and prolongs the rivalry between the two states. At the discourse and worldview level, identity-based and ideological differences constitute another important source of tension. Saudi Arabia’s Sunni-Wahhabi and Arab identity differs significantly from Iran’s Shi'a-Islamic and Persian identity, creating distinct political narratives and perceptions of regional order. Divergent worldviews and competing regional and international discourses have reinforced mutual suspicion and contributed to the escalation of tensions. Nevertheless, the declining influence of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, particularly in the context of the reforms introduced under Mohammed bin Salman, may reduce the salience of some identity-based and ideological sources of conflict. At the deepest level of analysis, myths and metaphors play a critical role in sustaining long-term patterns of distrust and hostility. Popular expressions such as “Ajam” (non-Arabs, Iranian), “Rafidi” (heretic), and “Bedouin Arab,” together with political metaphors such as the “Safavid Empire,” “American Islam,” and the “Wahhabi State,” reflect narratives associated with anti-Iranian and anti-Arab sentiment. These narratives function as powerful symbolic frameworks through which each side interprets the other, thereby reinforcing negative perceptions and perpetuating conflict. Although both countries have increasingly adopted pragmatic policies driven by economic and strategic considerations, such myths and metaphors remain deeply embedded within their historical memory and social consciousness. Consequently, reducing their influence is likely to require sustained and long-term efforts. Conclusion This study has examined the underlying causes of tensions between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia through the framework of Causal Layered Analysis. The findings demonstrate that the persistence and escalation of tensions cannot be attributed to a single factor but instead result from the interaction of multiple causes operating at different analytical levels. At the litany level, leadership rhetoric and media strategies contribute to the reproduction of tensions. At the systemic level, differences in political and economic systems, coupled with regional and international competition, continue to fuel rivalry. At deeper levels, worldviews, identity-based factors, ideological discourses, myths, and metaphors play a significant role in sustaining mutual distrust and conflict. The study concludes that meaningful improvement in Iran–Saudi relations requires not only the management of immediate political disputes but also efforts to address deeper structural, ideological, and perceptual sources of tension. While changes in leadership perceptions and the mitigation of systemic conflicts may facilitate rapprochement, transforming deeply rooted narratives, myths, and collective perceptions is likely to be a far more gradual and long-term process.

Abstract Introduction The contemporary international system is undergoing a profound geopolitical transformation marked by the gradual decline of U.S.-led unipolarity and the emergence of an increasingly complex multipolar order. This structural shift presents a significant foreign policy challenge for traditional American security partners, particularly Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom must simultaneously preserve its long-standing security relationship with Washington while expanding strategic economic, technological, and developmental partnerships with rising Eastern powers, most notably China and Russia. In response to these changing international dynamics, Saudi Arabia has adopted a foreign policy approach that can be characterized as pragmatic multilateralism. This strategy does not entail abandoning existing alliances nor pursuing a risky geopolitical realignment. Rather, it is based on the principle of positive balancing, through which Riyadh seeks to diversify its external partnerships, maximize strategic flexibility, and safeguard its national interests in an increasingly competitive international environment. Methodology This study employs a qualitative research design and adopts an explanatory-analytical methodology. It is based on an intensive single-case study focusing on the transformation of Saudi foreign policy during a critical period of regional and global change. The theoretical framework combines insights from neoclassical realism and complex interdependence theory in order to explain both the origins and the implementation of Saudi Arabia’s evolving foreign policy strategy. Neoclassical realism offers a macro-level explanation for the Kingdom’s strategic adjustment by linking systemic pressures—particularly the transition toward multipolarity—with domestic intervening variables such as leadership perceptions of threats, opportunities, and national priorities. Complex interdependence theory provides a complementary micro-level perspective by explaining how this strategy is implemented in practice through multiple and differentiated channels of international engagement. Data collection was conducted through a systematic content analysis of authoritative and publicly accessible sources, including official government documents and decrees, key foreign policy speeches by senior political leaders, aggregated international trade and investment statistics, and detailed reports produced by reputable international organizations and policy think tanks. The analysis employs an evidence-based approach, comparing observed empirical patterns—most notably the simultaneous evolution of Saudi Arabia’s security relations with Western powers and its expanding economic engagement with Eastern actors—with the distinct causal expectations generated by the study’s integrated theoretical framework. Findings and Discussion The findings provide strong support for the argument that Saudi Arabia’s contemporary foreign policy is the product of a dynamic interaction between systemic pressures and domestic imperatives. At the systemic level, this transformation has been shaped by perceptions of declining direct U.S. involvement and the broader transition toward an increasingly multipolar international order. At the domestic level, it has been driven by the imperative of economic diversification and comprehensive national transformation, as embodied in the Kingdom’s development vision, together with the leadership’s strategic assessment of the requirements of national security, survival, and long-term development. A key finding of the study is that Saudi Arabia has successfully managed potentially competing external relationships through a process of agenda categorization. This allows Riyadh to separate different areas of foreign policy engagement and assign them to distinct international partners. Security and defense cooperation remain primarily anchored in the strategic relationship with the United States, while economic modernization, technological development, and infrastructure expansion increasingly involve cooperation with China and, to a lesser extent, Russia. In its relations with the United States, Saudi Arabia has gradually moved beyond the traditional “oil-for-security” framework. The bilateral relationship has evolved into a more transactional and interest-based partnership characterized by negotiation and mutual benefit. Riyadh’s expanding ties with Eastern powers provide additional diplomatic leverage in its dealings with Washington, enabling the Kingdom to secure advanced military capabilities, political support, and continued security commitments while maintaining a greater degree of strategic autonomy. Saudi Arabia’s engagement with China and Russia follows a different but complementary logic. Relations with China are primarily shaped by economic considerations linked to the Kingdom’s long-term development objectives. Chinese involvement is particularly evident in infrastructure projects, technology transfer, and investment in non-oil sectors. By contrast, cooperation with Russia is concentrated in the energy domain, especially within the framework of OPEC Plus, where coordination has played a crucial role in stabilizing global oil markets and supporting Saudi economic planning. Importantly, Saudi Arabia has carefully managed these eastern partnerships according to the principles of cooperation without security alignment and engagement without strategic dependence. Taken together, the findings demonstrate that the Kingdom’s adopted strategy reflects a successful structural shift away from the historical model of exclusive dependence on a single superpower and toward a position characterized by greater strategic autonomy and enhanced operational flexibility within an increasingly multipolar international order. Conclusion This study argues that Saudi Arabia’s evolving foreign policy represents a structural and development-oriented strategy best described as flexible balancing. Through the successful implementation of pragmatic multilateralism, the Kingdom has fundamentally redefined its position within the international system. Saudi Arabia has transformed its traditional relationship with the United States from a predominantly hierarchical security arrangement into a more balanced partnership based on clearly defined mutual interests. At the same time, it has strategically utilized the economic, technological, and energy opportunities offered by China and Russia to advance its national development objectives and enhance its diplomatic influence. The cumulative effect of this strategy has been a significant increase in Saudi Arabia’s strategic autonomy and international maneuverability. Rather than functioning as a dependent actor within a U.S.-dominated order, the Kingdom has emerged as an increasingly independent middle power capable of engaging multiple major powers simultaneously while preserving freedom of action. Consequently, the study confirms its central hypothesis that Saudi Arabia’s dual-track strategy has enabled it to navigate geopolitical transition successfully and position itself as a key balancing actor within the emerging multipolar international system.

Abstract Introduction
West Asia has long been a hotspot for various forms of violence. The complex and multifaceted security threats in the region—coupled with the inherent fragility of states—demand that security be redefined within a new, regional framework. To break away from traditional security policies, there is increasing emphasis on the growing role of non-state actors, established norms, and cooperative security arrangements. In this context, the concept of governance is offered as a means to describe both the dispersion of power and the emergence of new oversight mechanisms that counterbalance state dominance. As a result, regional security governance is now seen as an important form of collective security. With this in mind, this study focuses on three key regional powers—Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia—to examine the process of security governance and the factors that shape it.
Methodology
The study employs a mixed-methods approach. On the quantitative side, international data were analyzed to review the progress of regional security governance over the past decade. For the qualitative aspect, a focus group session was conducted with 10 experts (9 men and 1 woman), and the discussions were analyzed using MAXQDA software.
Discussion and Results
In terms of persuasive (or soft) policies, Iran’s performance improved steadily, with its score rising from 20 in 2012 to over 24 in 2016. Conversely, Saudi Arabia’s persuasive policy score dropped from 48 in 2011 to about 33 in 2022, and Turkey also followed a downward trend. Regarding coercive (or hard) policies, Saudi Arabia achieved the highest score of 70 in 2015, while Iran recorded the lowest score of 40 in 2013. Additionally, Iran has been more effective in countering ISIS, whereas Saudi Arabia and Turkey escalated tensions with their military operations in Yemen and parts of Iraq and Syria, respectively. While Iran demonstrated that regional security is a top priority in its fight against ISIS, Turkey generally focused on protecting its borders from refugees and terrorist attacks, even seizing opportunities to intervene in Syria. The qualitative analysis identified 9 main categories and 25 sub-categories (with a total frequency of 310 mentions). Data analysis revealed that 84% of the obstacles to regional security governance in West Asia were associated with persuasive (soft) policies, while only 16% were linked to coercive (hard) measures. This finding suggests that before resorting to hard security tools, establishing regional security governance in this region should primarily rely on diplomatic dialogue and softer forms of engagement.
Conclusion
Focusing on Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, this research identifies both positive and negative factors influencing regional security governance in West Asia from 2011 to 2022. The study shows that security in the region cannot be ensured by governments alone. Instead, the active participation of non-state actors, international organizations, and a mix of persuasive (diplomatic and economic) and coercive (military and security) tools are crucial to shaping regional security governance. The analysis also indicates significant differences among the regional powers.Their national objectives tend to be almost diametrically opposed, resulting in a fluctuating form of regional security governance. For instance, the persuasive tools used by Iran in resolving regional disputes averaged a score of 22, compared to averages of 36 and 38 for Saudi Arabia and Turkey, respectively. While Saudi Arabia and Turkey show similar tendencies in their use of persuasive and coercive methods, Iran has taken a notably different approach. Reflecting on Europe's approach to regional security governance, it’s clear that after World War II, European nations were able to adopt a democracy-based framework with support from the United States that led to nearly uniform responses to conflicts.
However, in West Asia, the role of major powers has had the opposite effect—fueling tensions and exacerbating conflicts. Their involvement, most notably their support for the establishment of Israel, has contributed to major issues such as the Arab-Israeli wars, increased securitization, and a drift toward authoritarianism among regional governments. The military presence of extra-regional powers has pressured these countries to prioritize military solutions instead of diplomatic ones. Furthermore, the region’s geopolitical and economic significance continues to fuel competition among thses powers. Rivalries, such as that between China and the United States, have even led to bloc formations in the region, potentially undermining the development of regional security governance. Even the region's failed state- and nation-building process—which is seen as one of the main reasons why this form of governance has not been established in West Asia—has been influenced, to some extent, by the Sykes-Picot Agreement and by Israel.
The qualitative findings further highlight that regional powers’ abilities to protect their societies (by leveraging resources for defense and military intervention), combined with their unique interpretations of security and stability, domestic multi-actor dynamics (involving the role of non-state actors), and external delegations to regional organizations, are among the key factors shaping regional security governance. On the other hand, issues such as the Israel factor, extra-regional interventions, authoritarian tendencies, strategic culture, border disputes, and incomplete or unsynchronized political and economic structures have negatively affected its development.

Abstract Extended Abstract

Introduction:
Qatar and the United Arab Emirates stand as pioneers in the cultivation of soft power and national branding within the Persian Gulf region. Their leadership recognizes the pivotal role of branding in safeguarding and advancing national interests and security and continues to invest significant efforts in this domain. Recently, Saudi Arabia has also turned its attention towards this sphere, emerging as a unique and somewhat complex case study in terms of branding capacities and policies. Especially since the coming to power of the current king of Saudi Arabia in 2015 and the subsequent power consolidation of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Riyadh has embarked on a new trajectory of domestic and foreign policies. Changing Saudi Arabia’s image and its national branding is one of those. For this purpose, this paper aims to explore the fundamental question: “What role does national branding play in Saudi Arabia’s overarching policies, and how has this evolved during Salman’s reign?”
Methodology
This research is theoretically and conceptually grounded in Simon Anholt’s six-dimensional conceptual framework for national branding, which encompasses Exports; Governance; Culture; People; Tourism; and Immigration and Investment. Methodologically, the study adopts a descriptive-explanatory approach. Utilizing a qualitative method, data has been collected through library research and online resources.
Discussion and Results
Over the past decades, Saudi Arabia has carved out a distinctive international reputation, effectively establishing its national brand on the global and regional stages. This image is primarily shaped by three key facets. Firstly, the nation’s substantial capacities and capabilities in oil production and export, with Saudi Aramco leading as the world’s largest exporter of this commodity. Secondly, Saudi Arabia’s significant religious standing within the Islamic world, which extends its influence globally. Thirdly, its financial and economic aid to various countries, particularly within the Islamic world. This assistance is often manifested in the form of humanitarian or developmental aid. Thus, the triad of traditional elements shaping Saudi Arabia’s reputation and national brand, thereby crafting a unique and distinct image of the country on the international stage, encompasses its oil industry, religious influence, and humanitarian and developmental contributions.
Under the reign of King Salman, Saudi leaders have initiated a mission to reshape the past image, striving to project a new and positive depiction of the nation. While some previous policies have been maintained, significant changes have ushered in a new era for national branding. Central to this is the Vision 2030 document, which serves as the primary framework guiding efforts to effect a fundamental shift in Saudi Arabia’s position and global image. The document, aimed at diversifying Saudi Arabia’s oil-dependent economy, represents a strategic endeavor to shift the traditional perception of Saudi Arabia as merely an oil-rich country. Its three core tenets - fostering a vibrant society, building a thriving economy, and cultivating an ambitious nation - encapsulate the renewed image that Saudi leaders aspire to project, underscoring their commitment to transformative change.
The Saudis have gradually come to the conclusion that the traditional religious-conservative image and the presentation of Saudi Arabia as an oil country cannot contribute much to the soft power and the country's capacities. For this, the introduction of a new image as a country with a diverse economy, an open and moderate society, and efficient and modern governance, is considered an important part of the efforts of Saudi statesmen. In this context, a variety of strategies have been implemented with the goal of advancing to a new level of national branding. The most significant of these include economic branding, along with the promotion of Saudi Arabia as a nation with a diversified economy; cultural branding and social reforms, aimed at presenting Saudi Arabia as a moderate and non-extremist society; The development of tourism and branding that leverages cultural heritage; Enhancing governance to fortify the national brand; Sports branding; and Urban branding and the creation of new cities. These initiatives are crucial in achieving this objective.
Saudi leaders recognize the necessity of shifting global public opinion towards their country, including through national branding. They are striving to craft a positive, modern, and distinguished image of Saudi Arabia. These efforts involve acknowledging past weaknesses and negative perceptions, while also considering Riyadh’s regional competition with smaller neighbors such as the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. In this context, traditional capacities and structural barriers are also deemed significant.  Indeed, the political determination of the Saudis and their efforts to implement new policies and significant innovations are crucial.
Conclusion
Despite some accomplishments and positive outcomes in terms of national branding, there are several challenges that Saudi Arabia faces. These include:

The absence of a clear definition of branding as a distinct issue in national strategies;
The continued dominance of oil in Saudi Arabia’s economic structure, perpetuating the country’s image as an oil-based economy;
The potential escalation of internal conflicts and divisions due to cultural and social reforms, which could lead to new crises; and
The increasing political authoritarianism within the Saudi government and the limited participation of civil society in national branding.

 

Abstract The current research tries to answer the question that based on the Crisis Cube Model, what was Saudi Arabia's perception of Yemen crisis and what mechanisms did it use to manage the developments? The findings of the research indicate that according to the perception of the Saudi leaders, the crisis in Yemen is at the "A" level of the cube. This country aims to conquer some strategic areas such as Bab al-Mandab, Hadaralmut province and Bandar Makla, Al-Mahrah province and Bandar Nishtun, Bandar Hodeidah and get out of the geographical monopoly in the south and some southwestern areas, control the flow of the Houthis and effectively prevent them from the Shiite System and the federalization of Yemen into a system of regions, has created a crisis, and thirdly, under such conditions, the intelligent management of the crisis and the simultaneous use of aggressive and hard levers (military-security and alliance building) are semi-hard. (siege and economic and livelihood pressure) and soft (political-diplomatic and media) have been put on the agenda to both eliminate the threat of the Houthis and to achieve the geopolitical intentions. The research method is qualitative and the method of data collection is documentary analysis.

Abstract  
The purpose of the article is to examine King Salman of Saudi Arabia's approach towards Iran and the strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iran against Saudi actions. This paper hypothesizes that Saudi Arabia under King Salman has more than ever attempted to securitization of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the role of "functional actor". The main finding of this article is that support for securitization of Iran's regional role in the Middle East has been a key focus of Malik Salman's Saudi policy toward Iran. The new Saudi leaders have emphasized on what they called "Iran's destructive regional role" and tried to highlight Iran's policies and actions in the Middle East as the main threat to regional stability and security to mobilize various capacities against Iran. Although these measures have exacerbated security pressures against the Islamic Republic of Iran, however, trying to securitization of Iran has faced significant restrictions and challenges.
 

Abstract Iran and how to curb its regional influence has been one of the most important concerns of Saudi Arabia, especially over the past decade. The authors of this article maintain that the Saudis, through the adoption of a particular approach, has sought to expand their communication network in different areas in order to create integrated deterrence against Iran with the aim of compelling it to change its regional strategies. The main question asked in this article is how Saudi Arabia uses integrated deterrence to counter and contain Iran.
 
 

Abstract   The papers discusses first theories of possible analyses of the Saudi Arabia’s society from a political sociology perspective and then tackles active and inactive gaps in the field of religion and its sectors, tradition and modernism, pros and cons of the government and finally the generations gaps and tribal ones.  The main argument of the paper is that due to the lack of proper political, social, cultural and economic bed, and also with the short of a significant external crisis – like oil price drop- the social gaps in Saudi Arabia will not be activated and rather will be in a low profile mode and so the socio-political forces will not be strong enough.
 

Abstract  The paper intends to answer this question: given the current facts and realities in Saudi Arabia, which changes are probable in the field of economic development and political stability of the country? The author assumes that the in the short term the current economic situation will go on and the government’s dependency on oil will not be aborted. The Saudi government enjoys the oil revenues for the public well-being as well as gaining legitimacy and political stability. However, some of its officials are of the view that with should the status quo continue, both the national well-being and political stability will be at risk in the near future. Therefore, it is the time to transiting into a competitive and economy together with a variety.
 

Abstract  The Saudi Arabia political and legal system is somehow consistent with the Sharia and tradition and so there is no room for human rights. The individual in this country is within the foundational and comprehensive concepts based in tradition and so human rights cannot challenge the society in future. The same perspective is the case with regards to secular or religious legal system of the country as it is consistent enough with the social and cultural espatial of the Arab peninsula and it doesn’t need the legislation or legislator. However, the recent regional developments have emerged human rights as a threat against Saudi Arabia; a country in which the rights of its minority Shiite groups along with women’s and the children right  are being raised especially in the war in Yemen.
 

Abstract Although the geopolitical and security concerns have a great importance to diplomatic action and strategic decision making, the Saudi politicians have recently acted in a way that mare than these concerns, it is their cultural norms and identity that affects those decisions and this shapes their strategic culture. Given the importance of the said fact, the paper attempts to provide a clear picture of the Saudis strategic culture and in this way the main question is that what those elements and their influences are in this strategic culture. To answer these questions first a theoretical framework is offered to explain the strategic culture and then the elements and foundation of the Saudi strategic culture are identified and finally their influence on this culture will be discussed.

Abstract  This article explores the regional and international factors as the independent variables affecting foreign policy of Saudi Arabia and then it discusses four main features of its political system, namely, kingdom, wahhabism, rentierism and peninsula situation as the intermediate variables – domestic sources.  Within this approach, five principles and grand goals of its foreign policy, including peripheral dominance seeking, regional balance, Islamic- Wahhabism centralism, coalition building and anti – democracy actions are analyzed. The main existing issues of Saudi Arabia's foreign policy are to be further explained at different levels as the reference of its constant elements and grand goals.
 

Abstract  Due to geopolitical and regional developments and geo-strategic changes of the extra regional powers in the aftermath of the beginning of the 21^st century, the regional balance has been changed in favor of Iran and to the detriment of Saudi Arabia. This situation along with the domestic developments of Saudi Arabia including its new leadership have led to the understanding that if Iran's continuous influence would not be contained based on policy of rebuilding a regional balance, the future order of the West Asia should be Iran oriented order. Therefore, Riyadh has adopted an offensive policy and pursues the said policy absorbing three strategies of hardware balance, external balance and internal balance.