NON-STATE ACTORS IN THE MIDDLE EAST: IMPLICATIONS FOR REGIONAL SECURITY

Abstract

The state's Westphalian order, to be a high and powerful actor in international affairs, is declining. Now non-state actors have become major players in international affairs. These non-state actors have social, political, and military implications. Their armed forces and their media outlets are used to put pressure on states to change their policies or impose their ideology. These non-state elements vary based on organizational structure, operational strategy, ideological legitimacy, and military might. But, they have the same goal of increasing their power to influence states, protect their community, or impose their will. Most of the time, non-state actors come to the fore in response to the inadequacies, shortcomings, and unequal territorial demarcation of states. The Middle East is highly volatile and has more non-state actors than any other part of the world. The presence of many non-state actors has created more rifts and rivalries between enemies, and this trend has forced non-state actors to equip themselves more. Once non-state actors equip themselves, it threatens the security of the state as it enables them to conduct international operations. Regional competition between Iran-Saudi Arabia, UAE-Saudi Arabia, Turkey-Saudi Arabia, and Israel-Palestine, is the main reason for the emergence of non-state actors. Furthermore, peace, stability, and prosperity are considered to be in the best interests of the states that have the least supply in the Middle East. Sometimes, non-state actors work under the auspices of the state. The state inherits power from non-state actors, a legal force, but the problem arises when state hostages become the price of politics. This begs the question of what non-state actors are, and how they operate and endanger the security of states. In short, there is a correlation between non-state actors and weak states, negligence, and rights violations.