Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract
Introduction
Although the concept of sustainable security was explicitly introduced for the first time in the General Policies of the Fifth Development Plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its underlying principles had long been reflected in the country's constitutional, legal, and policy frameworks. This study examines the conceptualization of sustainable security across Iran’s major policy documents, including the Constitution, the Iran Vision 1404 Document, the First through Fifth Development Plans, and the General Policies of the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Development Plans.
Drawing on the theoretical and empirical literature, the study identifies the components, indicators, and security reference objects associated with sustainable security and classifies them into four dimensions: political-social, economic, security-defense, and environmental. In this context, security reference objects encompass both human beings and other human-centered entities that become subjects of security concerns, as well as the conditions and environments in which they exist. The study seeks to answer the following question: How do the macro-level documents of the Islamic Republic of Iran conceptualize sustainable security and the measures required to sustain it?
Methodology
This research adopts an exploratory qualitative approach. The content, themes, security reference objects, components, and indicators of sustainable security embedded in accessible macro-level documents were examined through textual and content analysis. Following their identification, the extracted concepts and categories were systematically classified according to their structural and substantive similarities. The resulting framework organizes sustainable security into four principal dimensions: political-social, economic, security-defense, and environmental. The concepts of security and sustainability were further interpreted through thematic analysis.
Findings and Discussion
The findings indicate that although the term sustainable security appears explicitly only in the General Policies of the Fifth Development Plan, its core themes are evident throughout other major policy documents. The analysis reveals that the political-social dimension receives the greatest emphasis, followed by the economic and security-defense dimensions, while environmental considerations receive comparatively limited attention.
A similar pattern is observed regarding the situational aspects of sustainable security. Although the documents contain references to sustaining conditions and managing their interrelationships, this dimension remains insufficiently developed. Furthermore, the dominant perspective underlying security-sustaining measures appears to assume relatively stable conditions rather than dynamic, evolving, and potentially turbulent environments. Given the increasing complexity and uncertainty of contemporary security challenges, this assumption may limit the effectiveness of long-term security policies.
Conclusion
The sustainability of security has become an increasingly strategic concern in light of wars, social unrest, rapid technological transformations, and the emergence of new forms of political and social change. While Iran’s macro-level policy documents acknowledge the importance of sustainable security, their treatment of the concept lacks sufficient conceptual clarity and comprehensiveness. A more systematic understanding of sustainable security can help address existing shortcomings in policymaking and implementation. Moreover, the continuous adaptation of policies and programs to changing security conditions is essential for maintaining and enhancing sustainable security.

Abstract Introduction
The relationship between health and security has long attracted scholarly attention; however, the connection between health and national security was conceptualized more systematically in the post–Cold War era. Biological warfare and biothreats have consistently been regarded as major security concerns. Despite significant advances in biotechnology, particularly in genetics and genome-editing technologies, which have paved the way for a new generation of biological weapons, several factors—including the complexity of human biological responses, globalization, and the limited availability of population-scale genomic data—have constrained their widespread deployment. Recent developments in genomics, together with advances in artificial intelligence, big data analytics, and the emergence of Precision Public Health (PPH), have the potential to transform the collection and analysis of biological data. These developments may fundamentally reshape the role of genomic information in security affairs and give rise to a new national security paradigm in which genomic data constitute a central strategic asset.
This article examines the evolution of biotechnology and explores the role of the Precision Public Health genomic platform in transforming the concept of national security. It argues that these developments may establish the human body as an independent domain of warfare while simultaneously redefining social and human concepts. Focusing on Iran, the study further highlights the need for a new framework for genomic data security.
Methods
This study employs a qualitative research design based on a descriptive-analytical approach. Data were collected through documentary research, drawing on books, scholarly publications, policy reports, and official documents. The collected materials were analyzed qualitatively to identify key trends, patterns, and conceptual relationships relevant to the study.
Findings and Discussion
Although biological threats have been a persistent feature of human history and technologies such as CRISPR (short for “clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats”) genome editing have introduced unprecedented possibilities for biological manipulation, the lack of comprehensive population-level genomic information has limited the practical use of biological warfare, leaving it a relatively underexplored and poorly understood mode of conflict. Evidence suggests that these constraints are gradually diminishing, potentially paving the way for biological warfare to become a more conventional form of conflict. This prospect has been increasingly reflected in scientific literature, strategic reports, and statements by political leaders of major powers. The emergence of the Precision Public Health genomic platform is likely to accelerate this trend.
The Precision Public Health platform was developed to prevent disease through the integration of genomics, environmental and behavioral data, and advanced analytical technologies. Broadly speaking, the platform performs two primary functions: first, the collection of genomic information through expanding digital connectivity and the generation of large-scale data from all dimensions of human life; and second, the design of continuous, adaptive, and individualized interventions based on real-time data, for the purpose of shaping and engineering future trajectories. The realization of these objectives requires the comprehensive medicalization of both individuals and society. Consequently, the platform extends beyond healthcare and seeks to manage and optimize multiple aspects of human life through genomic data.
This transformation alters traditional patterns of data collection by shifting control away from governments and private institutions toward platform-based ecosystems capable of generating continuous real-time data. Within this emerging paradigm, competition among major powers for access to and influence over genomic data becomes increasingly significant. In Iran, genomic data collection remains largely dependent on traditional academic and private-sector institutions, with a primary emphasis on personalized medicine. Nevertheless, the rapid global expansion of Precision Public Health is likely to influence Iran in the near future.
Conclusion
By generating real-time, individual-level, and population-scale genomic data through the expansion of digital connectivity, the Precision Public Health platform has the potential to remove one of the principal barriers to biological warfare. Early indications of this transformation were evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, when advances in biotechnology enabled the rapid development of vaccines within approximately one year. Current initiatives aimed at reducing vaccine and therapeutic development timelines to as little as one hundred days further illustrate this trajectory. Such achievements depend on access to detailed genomic information concerning both human populations and pathogens, information that can be generated through the Precision Public Health platform. If fully realized, these developments may signal the beginning of a new era in biological warfare.
More broadly, Precision Public Health may establish a data-driven mode of governance that gives rise to a new genomic paradigm in which social, political, and security concepts are interpreted through a genomic lens. In such a paradigm, human beings may increasingly be understood as repositories of genomic data, leading to profound transformations in identity. Likewise, the state acquires new meaning as platform-based authority increasingly influences legitimacy, policymaking, and power. Ultimately, governmental institutions may become components of a broader system of governing intelligence, operating within a data-centric framework of authority.

Abstract Introduction
Economic corruption is widely recognized as one of the major obstacles to sustainable development. In addition to reducing the efficiency of economic systems, it undermines public trust in institutions and governance. While a substantial body of research has examined corruption within governmental organizations, the rapid growth of quasi-governmental commercial enterprises calls for a renewed approach to understanding corruption in these entities.
Situated in an ambiguous position between the public and private sectors, quasi-governmental companies often benefit from the advantages of both. On the one hand, they enjoy access to public resources and state-backed privileges; on the other hand, their nominally private status allows them to avoid the stringent oversight typically imposed on public institutions. As a result of incomplete privatization processes, these organizations frequently exhibit neither the efficiency associated with the private sector nor the transparency and accountability expected of public institutions. This dual character creates fertile ground for various forms of economic misconduct.
Given the substantial financial resources controlled by these companies, corruption within them can lead to serious consequences, including disruptions in production processes, capital outflows, violations of minority shareholders' rights, and damage to the public interest. Therefore, effective corruption prevention requires a thorough understanding of the organizational conditions and mechanisms that facilitate corrupt behavior.
A review of the existing literature indicates that most studies have focused on macro-level determinants and structural dimensions of corruption, while relatively little attention has been paid to the internal organizational mechanisms and corruption-generating factors within quasi-governmental enterprises. Accordingly, the central question of this study is: What organizational conditions within quasi-governmental commercial companies create opportunities for economic corruption?
To address this question, the study employs a qualitative research design based on thematic analysis. Following a review of the relevant concepts and literature, the methodological framework is outlined, and the findings are presented and interpreted through a thematic matrix. The analysis focuses on identifying a set of intra-organizational opportunities that facilitate the misappropriation of corporate assets in quasi-governmental companies.
Methodology
This study adopts an interpretive qualitative approach aimed at uncovering hidden patterns of corruption. The research participants consisted of senior and middle-level managers with at least five years of managerial experience and postgraduate qualifications. Participants were selected through a two-stage sampling process involving purposive and snowball sampling until theoretical saturation was reached.
To collect data and enhance the credibility of the findings, eight in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. In parallel, twenty key organizational cases—including legal documents and audit reports—were examined over a six-month period.
The collected data were analyzed inductively using Braun and Clarke's six-phase thematic analysis framework with the aid of MAXQDA software. The resulting themes were subsequently organized into a thematic matrix. Throughout the research process, ethical considerations, including the confidentiality of documents and participants' identities, were strictly observed.
Findings and Discussion
The integration of the extracted themes with the theoretical framework reveals a three-dimensional structure that fosters corruption within quasi-governmental companies. The findings suggest that corruption emerges through the interaction of three interconnected factors:
1. Weak Corporate Governance: The Structural Foundation of Corruption
Weak corporate governance constitutes the primary foundation in which corruption develops. It creates opportunities for misconduct through three main mechanisms. First, deficiencies in organizational design, manifested in the prevalence of “golden signatures”, unquestioning employee compliance with superiors, the absence of effective oversight, and the frequent replacement or inexperience of managers. Second, the emergence of conflicts of interest, particularly through privileged access to information and the redirection of corporate resources toward personal gain. Third, ineffective human resource management, which contributes to information leakage and encourages former employees to engage in harmful competition with the company.
2. Destructive Organizational Culture: The Cognitive Facilitator
A dysfunctional organizational culture reduces the psychological barriers to misconduct by providing moral justifications for unethical behavior. This culture is characterized by the legitimization of informal networks through collusion, factionalism, and inadequate legal awareness. It is further reinforced by perceptions of organizational injustice arising from the absence of merit-based practices and inequitable compensation systems, both of which increase employees' propensity toward deviant behavior.
3. Defective Oversight: The Mechanism Sustaining Corruption
The findings indicate that oversight mechanisms are not necessarily absent; rather, they often fail to perform their deterrent function effectively. This failure stems from weaknesses in information systems, including reliance on outdated procedures, deficiencies in reporting and information management, and delayed detection of corrupt practices. Additional factors include inconsistent and discretionary supervision resulting from the lack of clear monitoring standards, the formalistic operation of internal control mechanisms such as boards of directors and supervisory committees, and excessive reliance on individual actors in oversight processes. Together, these shortcomings create a protective environment that enables misconduct to persist.
Conclusion
In contrast to previous studies that have primarily emphasized macro-level and political-economic explanations of corruption, this study demonstrates that the internal organizational structure of quasi-governmental companies plays a crucial role in the emergence of economic corruption.
The findings show that corruption arises from the interaction of three key factors: weak corporate governance, which creates opportunities for illicit gain; a destructive organizational culture, which provides motivation and moral justification for misconduct; and defective oversight, which emerged as the most prominent finding of the study. Although the oversight mechanism appears formally legitimate, its procedural nature and the breakdown of information systems significantly undermine its effectiveness and create a safe environment for corrupt actors.
The findings suggest that effective anti-corruption policies should move beyond purely punitive approaches and focus on organizational reform. Such reforms should include measures to address administrative injustices, particularly inequities in compensation and promotion systems, as well as the implementation of real-time, data-driven monitoring mechanisms. Furthermore, future research should examine industry-specific corruption mechanisms in order to develop more targeted and effective prevention strategies for the quasi-governmental sector.

Abstract Introduction
Water has become one of the most strategically important natural resources in today’s world. Population growth, economic development, and climate change have significantly increased pressure on available water resources, elevating water from a basic natural resource to a critical geopolitical asset. As states seek to secure and utilize water resources in pursuit of their national interests, competition over shared waters has become an increasingly important source of interstate tension and conflict. Uneven water distribution, the transboundary nature of many freshwater resources, and challenges associated with water governance are among the principal factors contributing to these tensions.
More than 60% of the world's freshwater resources cross national borders, making water a significant dimension of international tensions. Consequently, understanding the origins and dynamics of water-related disputes is essential for effective resource management and conflict prevention. Hydro-politics examines the interactions among states over the utilization and management of international water resources, where relationships may take the form of cooperation, competition, influence, or confrontation. Nearly half of the Earth's land surface lies within international river basins, and growing demographic and economic pressures have intensified competition over these shared resources. According to the Transboundary Waters Assessment Programme (TWAP), 286 international river basins worldwide support the livelihoods of more than 2.8 billion people and cover approximately 42% of the global land area.
Water disputes arise when stakeholders possess divergent interests, priorities, and perceptions regarding the use of shared resources. When negotiation and cooperation fail, such disagreements may escalate into conflict, often producing adverse environmental consequences, including land degradation and desertification. Increasing water scarcity and rising demand for shared resources have further heightened tensions in transboundary basins. Against this background, investigating the causes of hydro-political conflicts is crucial for developing effective management strategies and preventing future disputes. Accordingly, this study seeks to identify the principal causes of hydro-political conflicts and to develop a systematic framework for their classification.
Methodology
This applied study employs a descriptive-analytical approach to identify the various causes of hydro-political conflicts, classify them according to their underlying drivers, and examine representative examples associated with each category. Data were collected through extensive library research, including books, scholarly articles, online databases, and previous studies relevant to the research topic. In addition, a historical analysis was conducted to provide a deeper understanding of the factors contributing to the emergence of hydro-political conflicts, and illustrative case studies were selected to demonstrate the role of each identified driver.
Findings and Discussion
Given the growing importance of hydro-political issues in national planning, resource management, and international relations, this study examines conflicts among riparian states within international river basins in order to identify their primary causes. Analysis of interactions among riparian countries across different river basins reveals that water quantity and quality, dam construction and hydraulic infrastructure development, hydropower production, flood control measures, irrigation and agricultural water use, boundary disputes, and the governance of shared basins constitute the most significant drivers of hydro-political conflict.
Following the identification of these drivers, hydro-political conflicts were classified according to their underlying causes, such as disputes over territorial boundaries or water availability. River basins in which particular factors played a dominant role in generating conflict were then examined as illustrative cases. The findings indicate that conflicts related to water quality, water allocation, and boundary issues are fundamentally rooted in competing interests among riparian states. These competing interests are themselves shaped by the geopolitical characteristics of the basin and the broader political geography of the countries involved.
The analysis further demonstrates that water alone rarely constitutes the sole cause of conflict. Rather, disputes emerge when water-related challenges intersect with broader political, economic, and social factors, including strategic competition, conflicting national interests, historical rivalries, ethnic and religious divisions, political disagreements, and economic inequalities. Conversely, experiences from several international river basins show that dialogue, institutional arrangements, and cooperative mechanisms can transform potential sources of conflict into opportunities for collaboration and mutual benefit.
Another important finding is the interdependence of the various drivers of hydro-political conflict. A single action may simultaneously affect multiple dimensions of interstate water relations. For example, the construction of large-scale hydraulic infrastructure for hydropower generation may influence downstream water availability and water quality while also improving flood management and agricultural irrigation. Consequently, understanding hydro-political conflicts and developing effective solutions requires a multidimensional analytical framework that accounts for the complex interactions among environmental, political, economic, and social factors.
Conclusion
Hydro-political issues are becoming increasingly prominent in global affairs and have emerged as a major concern in international policy debates, particularly in arid, densely populated, and environmentally vulnerable regions such as the Middle East and North Africa. Achieving sustainable development requires not only an accurate understanding of current hydro-political conditions but also the capacity to anticipate future challenges and opportunities. Effective planning and policymaking therefore depend on comprehensive and sophisticated analyses of hydro-political dynamics. Ultimately, sustainable human development, economic prosperity, and regional stability are inseparable from secure and equitable access to water resources.

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.