Abstract:
This research illustrates that optimal Foreign Policy (FP) picks differ with societal pressure and policymaker’s socioreligious reasoning, i.e., inclination and interpretations formed by their belief and socialisation system. Quite simply, what is the intensity of policymakers’ comprehending the political world from their social world? In this context, this mixed-method study analyses Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan as an agent and the domestic factors, i.e., the government’s posture and societal pressure factor in understanding the intensity of socioreligious reasoning involved in devising Pakistan’s FP decisionmaking process towards an eternal ally, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), and their decision outcomes? Three years of Khan’s regime is analyzed using the Poliheuristic Theory (PHT) and the pre-theory of FP whilst concentrating on an alleged spark in their relations on the Kashmir question. A newly constructed notional-actinal model, synergized as IIDS (Inclination-Incentive-Disincentive-Steps), is prompted to measure the intensity of policymakers’ linking socioreligious-based noncompensatory principle (notions), i.e., the administration’s belief and political ideologue, into FP execution (actions). Hence, the socioreligious-based and uncertain decisions under the Khan regime are attempted to interpret using this model. This research, while addressing IIDS, also aimed to overcome the deficiency of the FP literature of Pakistani leaders based on sociological and psychological grounds. It uses content analysis as a method, whereas the experts are interviewed using the purposive sampling technique. Findings declare that Pak-Saudi relations resumed after a departure due to Pakistan’s over expectations upon the KSA to resolve the Kashmir dispute conditioned to religious uniformity. Besides, the Kashmir support narrative has powerful domestic sources, but the leader’s personality also has a share in galvanising the cause. This study suggests that Pakistan should avoid believing that Saudis would get involved by sacrificing their material interest with India. Similarly, Saudis should not expect Pakistan’s traditional compliance, despite its dependence upon the KSA, considering its various prospective options owing to its geostrategic location and partnership with China. Irrefutably, the Kashmir issue is to be resolved bilaterally, yet the global resolving bodies must consider it a humanitarian crisis rather than a bilateral territorial dispute.
