Abstract/Summary

In the recent past, Oman has made independent foreign policy choices which differ from its allies in the Gulf. While most Arab Gulf states tend to take sides and pursue a confrontational approach during regional conflicts, Oman has chosen to act as a mediator. Applying Mark Bevir’s interpretive framework that concentrates on explaining political actions by locating them against the background of traditions and as responses to dilemmas, this thesis seeks to provide a more nuanced understanding of Oman’s frequent involvement as a mediator. This is achieved by examining Oman’s mediation role undertaken during the Iran-Iraq War, the Yemeni Civil War, and the Iranian nuclear deal. The study relies on primary and secondary material, including documentary analysis and elite’s interviews. This study argues that upon gaining power, Sultan Qaboos embarked on a socio-political programme consolidating Oman’s national unity and national independence. In articulating his programme, he drew on a series of traditional ideas and historical references, which also came to frame understandings of Oman’s foreign policy orientation during the 1970s. It shows that by 1980, the belief in Oman’s cultural distinctiveness and vulnerability to external intervention had emerged as tantamount to ‘traditions’, playing a significant role in structuring Omani policy-makers’ reading of regional security dilemmas, and the policies they adopt. In this context, Oman’s desire to preserve its culturally distinct identity have constrained her pursuit of national independence, and shaped her response to foreign policy dilemmas, leading to the emergence of mediation as a policy practice. Oman’s earlier adaptation of a ‘balanced’ approach, and later ‘neutral’ stance, followed by its active mediation role towards the end of the Iran-Iraq War, were formed against the background of these traditions of thought. The study demonstrates that Omani policy-makers have been able to adjust their practice and policy as they have responded to each new policy dilemma posed by regional upheavals. In doing so, they developed mediation as a new tradition of policy practice.