ABSTRACT

The foreign and security policies of smaller Gulf states have frequently defied traditional theoretical expectations related to small states. Through the investigation of three case studies – the debates regarding the creation of a Gulf union, reactions to the Iranian revolution and the Iraqi–Iranian war, and tendencies to make alliances – the analysis argues that calculations regarding relative size, variations in the perception of political and military threats, and the changing evaluation of the American alliance and its political costs drove the behaviour of smaller Gulf states to a greater degree than balance of power calculations or their sense of physical vulnerability. By the 21st century, these developments led to diverging foreign and security policy strategies.