Study Notes: The Regional-Supremacy Trap and Middle Eastern Disorder

The Middle East has transitioned from a security architecture managed by the United States into a "battle zone" characterized by a lack of consensual norms and balancing mechanisms.
The "regional-supremacy trap" occurs when a power vacuum and the desire for regional hegemony draw influential actors into endless, cumulative conflicts.
Instability persists because major regional actors lack cooperative mechanisms to shape a new order.

US foreign policy has shifted from post-Cold War unilateralism to "offshore balancing" and retrenchment, particularly during the Obama and Trump administrations.
Key drivers for US withdrawal include changing threat perceptions, domestic shale gas developments, and a strategic "pivot to Asia."
External powers like Russia, China, and the European Union pursue leverage or commercial interests but refrain from the high cost of constructing a new regional order.
This retrenchment has forced regional states to adopt independent, assertive, and often inconsistent security initiatives.

The region is defined as a "battle zone": an area where no single party has full control and chronic instability is the norm.
A significant factor in the lack of external intervention to restore order is the region's minimal role in the "global value chain" and "space of flows," aside from energy supply.
Regional states prioritize "state security, deterrence, and negative peace" over collaborative stability.

Saudi Arabia: A status quo power that bandwagons with the United States; it utilizes high-tech weapons and a $740$ billion GDP to contain rivals and prevent the rise of other hegemons.
Turkey: A revisionist power pursuing "geopolitical exceptionalism" and "neo-Ottomanism"; it seeks to be an "order-instituting actor" but has become entangled in sectarian fault lines.
Iran: A counter-hegemonic power that promotes the "Resistance Front" across Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon to challenge the Western-structured order.
The struggle is evident in the Syrian war, where no aspirant power (Iran, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia) has been able to dictate priorities or achieve total dominance.

Prioritization of region over power: The belief that being geographically central necessitates becoming a regional hegemon.
Misperception of dominance: Pursuit of hegemony without the necessary non-military resources, such as financial superiority, cultural attraction, and ideational values.
Zero-sum strategies: Implementing strategies aimed at total dominance in all areas, leading to the erosion of capabilities and perpetual insecurity.

The region suffers from a "disorder syndrome" where the old order is dying but a new one cannot be born.
Current strategies focus on being the "strongest power in a weak region" rather than fostering "efficient states in a stronger region."
The syndrome is expected to continue for the foreseeable future, although Iran’s status—threatened by domestic pressure and sanctions—remains a potential game-changer that could alter current regional dynamics.