“Moderate” Arab States: From the Cold War to the Syrian Conflict

Moderation has been a recurring theme in international politics. This has been particularly true in the international politics of the Middle East, where foreign and regional actors have often categorized others and selves as either ‘moderates’ or ‘radicals’. However, very few works have sought to deconstruct the meaning of moderation in this context. The few works that have addressed the issue have mostly treated moderation as a Western attempt to simplify regional geopolitics and dichotomize regional actors to justify their choice of allies and their foreign policy toward the region. This article seeks to provide an explanation of the meaning and uses of moderation. It argues that the ‘moderate’ has evolved from a category of analysis to a category of practice. The so-called moderates have actively engaged with this category of analysis and, after negotiating its meaning, have embraced it as a description of themselves. Examining the evolution of the ‘moderate Arabs’ label since the Cold War to the Syrian Civil War, the article demonstrates how the meaning of moderation has evolved through negotiations between the foreign powers that introduced it, and the so-called moderates themselves. Furthermore, it demonstrates how the emergence of the ‘moderate Arabs’ as a category of practices has come to play in regional geopolitics.