It sometimes seems that the dominant feature of post-Cold War international relations is the regionalization of global politics. 1 To the extent that this trend is real, it has been accompanied by another, perhaps contradictory transformation: the globalization of regional security studies. What this means, in fact, is the intellectual hegemony of Western analytical models of regional security studies.
In almost every single regional security setting, analysts are now using the same concepts and terminology, and when they meet, they are able to carry out a common security discourse. This trend is part of the proliferation of regional security institutions-also variously described as regimes, orders, structures, forums, frameworks and architectures. Some of these, including the OSCE, WEU (now absorbed by the EU), and ASEAN/ARF, have achieved a high degree of institutional complexity and have attracted a great deal of scholarly attention. Others, such as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP), SAARC, SADC, the Indian Ocean Rim Initiative, and a long list of other agencies, are in less advanced stages of development and have received less attention in the scholarly literature.
The same taxonomies and the same terminological imprecision which characterize analyses of other regions are also apparent in discussions of Middle Eastern security issues. Here, too, analysts acknowledge the value of regional structures to reduce transaction costs and change the payoff structure of security arrangements by lengthening the shadow of the future. 2 Here, too, policy analysts and practitioners pay lip service to the desirability of reducing uncertainties by implementing non-threatening defense