Since the end of World War II, several local actors have tried to gain regional dominance in the Middle East. These attempts have met with varying levels of success. This study seeks to explain this variation. We will not address the equally important question of when and why specific states decide to make bids for regional dominance. We maintain that while realism is a useful theoretical lens for explaining this variation, it is necessary to adjust some realist assumptions slightly to make realism work well in the Middle Eastern context. This is so because realism was developed based on modern European and American experiences. Specifically, our adjustments of realism's assumptions produced the following three preconditions that must be met for a local actor's bid to succeed. First, one must pursue those types of power which are the most potent at a specific time given the Middle Eastern environment. Second, while traditional realists recommend forging large coalitions by reducing threat perception and making bargains through traditional diplomacy or Realpolitik, we argue that domination through subversion or intimidation is more effective. Third, one must not only avoid counterproductive intervention by the great powers, but also have them actively on one's side.

中文翻译：

---

谁在当代中东的地区优势竞争中成功？

自第二次世界大战结束以来，一些当地参与者试图在中东地区取得统治地位。这些尝试取得了不同程度的成功。本研究试图解释这种变化。我们将不讨论同样重要的问题，即何时以及为什么特定州决定竞标地区主导地位。我们坚持认为，现实主义是解释这种变化的有用理论镜头，但有必要稍微调整一些现实主义的假设，以使现实主义在中东环境中行之有效。之所以如此，是因为现实主义是根据现代欧美经验发展而来的。具体而言，我们对现实主义假设的调整产生了以下三个前提条件，对于这些前提条件，本地参与者要想获得成功就必须做到。第一的，在中东环境下，人们必须追求在特定时间最有效的权力。其次，尽管传统的现实主义者建议通过减少威胁的感知并通过传统的外交或Realpolitik讨价还价来组建大型联盟，但我们认为通过颠覆或恐吓进行统治更为有效。第三，不仅必须避免大国的适得其反的干预，而且还必须使它们积极地站在自己的一边。