Karen Zraick wrote the article Persian (or Arabian) Gulf Is Caught in the Middle of Regional Rivalries, and it was published on January 12, 2016 in The New York Times. In the article, Zraick examines a dispute in the naming of a water body that separates two regions in the Middle East. He suggests that the dispute has its roots in the history, politics, and the pride of those who claim ownership of the region (Zraick n.p).
The issue entails the naming of a gulf in the Middle East where one play insists that it should be referred to as the Arabian Gulf while the other prefers the Persian Gulf. The main players in the dispute are Iran and Saudi Arabia. Specifically, insists that it should be called the Persian Gulf and goes ahead to ban publications that do not use the name. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, as well as other Arab nations in the region, prefers the name Arabian Gulf, and they have succeeded in pushing various entities to use their preferred name (Zraick n.p).
While this may sound like a minor dispute, it has some significant geopolitical implications. Primarily, the issue demonstrates the levels of competition and hostility between the two regional powers, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Many nations that have interests in the region, such as the United States, take the conflict seriously, and they use the name Arabian Gulf for fear of isolating its regional allies (Zraick n.p).
One can understand the source of the dispute by examining it through the first triangle that forms the basis of political geography. On the one hand of the triangle are the issues of politics, power, and policy. Power is the object that supports the other two elements, while politics is the entire set of processes involved in exercising, resisting, and achieving power, including issues such as functions of the state and its warfare. Policy refers to the intended outcomes or the things which power enables one to achieve as well as the elements that are widely influenced by politics (Zraick n.p).
Zraick aptly captures these notions by indicating that in a situation where Iran and Saudi Arabia are attempting to outmanoeuvre each other to be the region’s superpower, a name can be powerful. Both countries are trying to assert their influence, power, and dominance in the region through various means, including the involvement clashes in Yemen and Syria. Furthermore, Zraick notes that throughout history, the term “Persian Gulf” has been used in documents, maps, and diplomatic agreements, from the ancient Persian Empire that dominated the region, and even by the Greeks and Britons. This demonstrates that Iran’s attachment to the name “Persian Gulf” has its roots in the historical power that Iranian’s former Persian Empire held in the region.
On the other hand, the influence of politics and policy in the dispute is also evident. According to Zraick, the push to refer to the region as the Arabian Gulf gained momentum during the Pan-Arab Nationalist Movement that emerged in the late 1950s. The late President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt propelled the movement’s activities and the policies. In the 1960s, the Arab Gulf states adopted the name Arabian Gulf and mandated its use part of the Gulf Cooperation Council’s policy. At the core of the geostrategic dispute, the name is a source of friction in diplomatic encounters between different states in the Middle East (Zraick n.p).
Works Cited
Zraick, Karen. “Persian (or Arabian) Gulf Is Caught in the Middle of Regional Rivalries”. The New York Times. January 13, 2016. Web. February 15, 2016.
