Saudi-Iran Conflict from Constructivist Perspective

The protracted rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran has been a defining feature of Middle Eastern geopolitics for decades. Traditional analyses often attribute the tensions to sectarian divides, regional power ambitions, or competing political ideologies. However, the constructivist perspective in international relations offers a nuanced and compelling framework for understanding the deep-rooted dynamics of the Saudi-Iran conflict. This article explores the conflict through the lens of constructivism, emphasizing identity formation, perception, and the social construction of state interests.

Understanding Constructivism in International Relations

Constructivism is a theoretical approach that argues international politics are shaped not merely by material capabilities or institutional structures but by ideational factors such as beliefs, identities, norms, and discourse. Unlike realism or liberalism, constructivism contends that state interests are not pre-given but socially constructed through historical interactions and shared understandings. This perspective emphasizes how states perceive one another and how these perceptions influence behavior and policy.

Historical Context of the Saudi-Iran Rivalry

The roots of the Saudi-Iran conflict can be traced to the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which replaced the pro-Western Shah with an Islamic Republic led by Ayatollah Khomeini. The revolution introduced a new ideological paradigm in the region, challenging the legitimacy of monarchical systems like Saudi Arabia's. Iran's revolutionary rhetoric aimed to export its Islamic governance model, which was perceived as a direct threat by the Saudi leadership.

From a constructivist viewpoint, this period marked a transformation in mutual perceptions and identity construction. Iran began to see itself as the vanguard of Islamic resistance and an alternative to Western-backed autocracies, while Saudi Arabia intensified its identity as the custodian of Sunni Islam and a defender against Shia encroachment. These contrasting identities, solidified over decades, have reinforced a zero-sum perception of regional influence.

Identity Politics and Sectarian Narratives

A central theme in constructivist analysis is the role of identity in shaping state interests and actions. The Sunni-Shia divide, while theological in origin, has been politically instrumentalized by both Saudi Arabia and Iran. Constructivism posits that sectarianism is not a timeless animosity but a socially constructed cleavage amplified by political elites to mobilize support and delegitimize the other.

Saudi Arabia has portrayed Iran as a sectarian aggressor, using its influence over Shia populations in Bahrain, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen to project power. Conversely, Iran frames Saudi Arabia as a proxy for Western imperialism and a suppressor of Islamic unity. These narratives are continually reinforced through media, education, and political discourse, entrenching societal perceptions and justifying foreign policy actions.

Regional Proxies and the Social Construction of Threats

The conflict is also manifested in various proxy wars across the region, from Syria and Iraq to Yemen and Lebanon. A constructivist interpretation views these engagements not merely as strategic power plays but as extensions of identity politics and perceived existential threats. For instance, Iran's support for Hezbollah and the Houthis is partly motivated by a narrative of resistance against oppression, while Saudi Arabia’s interventions are framed as efforts to curb Iranian expansionism.

These perceptions shape policy decisions. The idea that "allowing Iranian influence to grow" equates to a direct threat to Saudi identity and regional hegemony is not a material calculation alone but a deeply embedded belief system. Constructivism thus highlights how state behavior is guided by shared understandings and constructed realities rather than objective threats alone.

International Alliances and Normative Influences

Constructivist theory also accounts for the role of international norms and alliances in reinforcing state behavior. Saudi Arabia's longstanding alliance with the United States and Iran’s alignment with non-Western powers like Russia and China contribute to their self-perceptions and reinforce their strategic narratives. These alliances are not only about military cooperation but also about shared ideologies and normative commitments.

Furthermore, global discourses around terrorism, human rights, and nuclear proliferation are interpreted differently by both states, shaping their international identities. Iran’s narrative of resistance against Western imperialism and Saudi Arabia’s positioning as a moderate Islamic power reflect how global norms are localized and reframed to suit domestic and regional agendas.

Conclusion: Reimagining the Conflict

From a constructivist perspective, the Saudi-Iran conflict is more than a struggle for power or territory—it is a battle over identities, narratives, and the social meanings attached to regional order. Understanding the conflict through this lens reveals that resolving it requires more than military or diplomatic measures; it necessitates a reconfiguration of how these states perceive themselves and each other.

By addressing the constructed nature of enmity and fostering new discourses of coexistence and mutual respect, there is potential to shift the dynamics of this enduring rivalry. In the realm of international relations, where perceptions often shape reality, constructivism offers both a diagnostic and a prescriptive tool for peacebuilding in the Middle East.