Introduction
Numerous concepts, processes, historical events, and legislative structures play a significant role in the consolidation of a nation. Moreover, when engaging in self-identification, societies refer to their cultural values to understand their primary characteristics and feel a sense of unity. Few people would probably think that foreigners also contribute significantly to defining a national community. In their article titled “Identity, Community and Belonging in GCC States: Reflections on the Foreigner,” Lowi (2018) focuses on the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the role of migrant workers in this nation’s identification and consolidation. The author adopts an approach that has not been used by other researchers on this topic, so the arguments presented in the article are pretty important.
The Purpose of the Article
Overall, after highlighting a considerable gap in the literature regarding the self-identification of people from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the author presents a strong and well-developed claim that is supported with evidence, opinions, and discussions. According to the researcher, previous studies that attempted to explore the roles of foreign communities in Gulf states primarily focused on low-income and unskilled employees, mostly of Asian descent (Lowi, 2018). However, in his article, Lowi (2018) addresses the role of the foreigner, including “whites of European descent – among them, North Americans, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans – and non-GCC Arabs” (p. 403). They are viewed as active participants in the nation’s consolidation, and Lowi (2018) explores in detail how the concept of foreigner contributes to shaping the identity of the Gulf population and fostering national cohesion. Moreover, the article argues that incorporating foreigners also enables the Gulf monarchs to safeguard their privileges.
Summary
To build the argumentation, the author of the article begins by examining the concept and the legal sides of citizenship in GCC states. Thus, legislation defines and establishes the national community’s boundaries, dividing people into “us” and “them” and regulating whether and in what cases some of “them” can become “us” (Lowi, 2018). Starting from the late 1860s, the GCC states began to create their nationality laws, granting citizenship rights based on specific characteristics, with the key principle being “the principle of paternal jus sanguinis” (Lowi, 2018, p. 405).
The “original” citizens were granted more privileges and rights than those who had to earn their citizenship through naturalization. Later, many states introduced changes to their laws in response to external circumstances and needs. For instance, “with the inception of the oil industry in the mid-1940s, Saudi authorities, anxious to attract labor – and skilled labor especially, did so by extending nationality based on applications” (Lowi, 2018, p. 405). Therefore, foreigners received an opportunity to stay in the GCC states, work there, and receive citizenship. Still, their rights and access to resources were limited, and they were never considered equal and actual citizens.
After these instances of relative inclusion, many states stopped extending their communities. For those who were not descendants of male citizens, it was almost impossible to officially become members of the GCC states (Lowi, 2018). According to the author, this evident division between national citizens and migrants helped the authorities to maintain their power. They employed various techniques to deter foreigners from staying or to keep them as strangers without rights and privileges. What is more, “maintaining the citizen’s relative entitlement is an implicit regime goal for it is a means to placate the citizen vis-à-vis the overwhelming power of the state” (Lowi, 2018, p. 407). The authorities excluded foreigners to conciliate citizens.
Furthermore, the author divides the foreigners into the three groups mentioned earlier in the paper and proceeds to describe how they had different impacts on shaping the identity of the GCC states. Firstly, Lowi (2018) indicates that “in the process of building modern states, the nature of the interaction with foreigners began to change as Gulf rulers assumed the role of employer, formerly occupied by the ‘European’” (p. 410). The latter were involved in their preparation alongside Arab and Asian migrants, but probably had the most substantial impact, as they filled positions such as managers, designers, and advisors. As mentioned by a Saudi national, the GCC authorities “try to modernize and westernize, but also, show the West that they are obedient and just like them” (Lowi, 2018, p. 409). The self-identity of people living in these states was significantly influenced by their tendency to adopt a modern and European-like identity.
Further, when discussing Arab migrants, the author raises a pretty interesting topic of cultural similarities and unity. It is noticeable that while all foreign workers posed a severe threat to the GCC nationality and authorities, precisely Arabs were seen as a much greater concern (Lowi, 2018). The majority of these employees were Muslims as well, which related them to prosperous Arab-Muslim host societies that did not want to accept them and share their wealth. Therefore, their presence was quite destabilizing, and it was prohibited to relate to Arab migrants based on their religion, language, and ethnicity, and state that they deserved better treatment and more rights (Lowi, 2018). The three characteristics mentioned, which were once used to establish cultural similarities, later became a significant liability. Thus, Gulf monarchies needed to pay more attention to a different group of foreigners who would be easier to reject.
Asian employees became the third group, and it was perfect for the authorities that they were a much cheaper labor force. Lowi (2018) mentions that Asian migrants were also less demanding and more satisfied with the poor treatment they received. These descriptions support the statement of Ahn Nga Longva, who said that “migrants are the foil in relation to which the Gulf nationals perceive and define themselves” (as cited in Lowi, 2018, p. 403). To further separate these foreigners and reduce the potential threats they posed, the hierarchy was extended, and the structures of bifurcation and segmented labor markets were introduced.
With bifurcation, most representatives of these foreign groups were segregated or even excluded from the general functioning of the society. Not only did they have to live in purposefully segregated areas, but they were often denied healthcare and other essential services. In the hierarchy created by Gulf monarchies, actual citizens were at the top, followed by white Europeans, then Arabs, and lastly, Asians (Lowi, 2018). The article’s author explains this discriminating division using several approaches, one of which is that the GCC adopted the same approach employed by other countries where capitalism prevailed.
Overall, in his paper, the author demonstrates that these three groups of foreign individuals residing and working in the GCC states play significant roles in shaping the nation’s identity, and these roles are distinct yet somewhat similar. Lowi (2018) writes that “while legislation fixes the contours of the nation, the absorption of foreign labor, and the distinctive ways thereof, contribute to shaping its identity” (p. 402). By restricting these people’s access to resources and simultaneously using them as a means of generating profit, Gulf monarchies ensure that actual citizens can distinguish themselves from migrants, as the former have better privileges and more rights. These citizens feel more united as a society compared to foreign workers, and the thoughts and practices associated with this shape their identity.
Important Discussion Points and Questions
An important point should be raised after summarizing the article. Thus, it is significant to highlight the concept of being “almost the same, but not quite” (Lowi, 2018, p. 423). The authorities promote this concept by using separation and marginalization, so white Europeans at the top of the hierarchy feel they are almost as privileged as the Gulf citizens but still relate to other migrants. The same concept can be applied to the remaining two groups, thereby maintaining the stability of the hierarchy. A question that may be formulated in light of this idea is the following: How does this concept affect Asian workers who are at the bottom of the social structure, and what are the further implications of their perceptions on the consolidation of the nation?
Conclusion
To conclude, Lowi (2018) proves that foreigners play a considerable role in shaping the nation’s self-identification. Firstly, all migrant workers enhance the unity of citizens, prompting the latter to highlight differences between them and be content with their privileges. Secondly, the three main groups of foreigners have their own impacts, with white Europeans promoting capitalistic views and Westernization as they are at the top of the social hierarchy. Further, by marginalizing Arabs, the authorities state that religious and cultural similarities do not play any role, and Asian workers help them make significant profits.
Reference
Lowi, M. R. (2018). Identity, community and belonging in GCC states: Reflections on the foreigner. Sociology of Islam, 6(4), 401-428.