Omansk diplomati: En studie om ibadismens närvaro i sultanatets utrikespolitik

Sammanfattning

This study examines whether Ibadi principles can be identified in Oman's diplomatic behavior in two cases: the US-Iran nuclear negotiations leading to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the Yemeni civil war. Drawing on constructivist theory, the analysis operationalizes three principles derived from the literature on Ibadism and Omani diplomacy: neutrality, consensus-seeking, and secrecy/quiet diplomacy. Using a qualitative text analysis with a most-different case design, the study finds that all three principles are present in both cases. However, their expression varies depending on the context of the conflict. In the case of the JCPOA agreement, where the threat was indirect and negotiable, neutrality remained largely uncontested, consensus was formulated positively around shared gains, and secrecy was paramount. In the Yemen case, where the threat was direct and acute, neutrality became more contested, consensus was framed negatively around avoiding further losses, and secrecy was combined with strategic openness to protect Oman from external pressure. The study concludes that Ibadi principles can be identified in Omani diplomacy, but they function as an adaptive framework rather than rigid rules. Their manifestation is shaped by conflict characteristics and Oman's security interests.