Latest Articles

The youth revolution in Yemen at the beginning of 2011 kindled a ray of hope that the walls of tyranny could be broken down and the country could be pulled back from the clutches of narrowly defined identities. It sharpened the will that formed a “historical bloc” capable of rendering democratic transition successful. However, the youth revolution never transcended the ecstasy of a romantic revolutionary act to reach the stage of building institutions capable of enforcing respect for the law and accommodating ethnic, tribal, sectarian and political pluralism. This study addresses the impact of the Saudi-Iranian role on Yemen's transition. It is premised on considerable importance attached regional factors, which perhaps have even greater influence than domestic factors on the outcome of the Yemeni revolution. The study stresses that the effects and limits of regional factors are related to several variables, such as the vicissitudes of international politics; international and regional balances and interests; as well as the strategic location of the country subject to interference; its resources; its internal dynamics; the maturity of local elites; the weight of political opposition; and the quality of institutions.

​This study traces the evolution of the sporting boycott of Israel from its inception and its impact on the colonial system of Israeli apartheid. It contextualises the development of this boycott in major international sports tournaments over the past decade, and how the outbreak of the Arab revolutions in late 2010 gave additional impetus to Arab youth to boycott Israel and sports in particular. Their boycott went hand in hand with their demands to end tyranny and autocracy, giving Arab athletes an opportunity to transform major international sports tournaments into a space for political action. The paper argues that the sporting boycott of Israel emerged in the last decade as a political tool for athletes and assesses the impact of this campaign in international sports tournaments on Israel's international reputation, its sports brand, and its diplomatic efforts related to marketing its emerging sports entrepreneurship.

The study centers on a major problem related to rational choice theory and its applications in international relations and foreign policy. It asks whether the selection process is subject to the principle of maximizing benefit according to this theory, or is subject to other principles, psychological processes and cognitive biases. The study reached conclusions that confirm that the selection process is in fact subject to a non-standard process; that is, it is not subject to continuous choices to benefit maximization, but there are other factors that lead to the selection of risk over gain, and here the psychological aspects overlap with the rational aspects in influencing the choice. This reveals that it is not possible to separate the school that focuses on the psychological aspects of the decision maker and the school that focuses on rational calculations, but rather that the two can be combined together within the framework of alternative theories complementary to rational choice theory, such as the perception theory.

Current scholarship on elections in authoritarian regimes has focused on exploring the relationship between elections and democratization, and it has generally used analytical frameworks and methods imported from the study of genuinely democratic elections to do so. These tendencies have kept scholars from asking a wide range of questions about the micro-level dynamics of authoritarian elections and the systematic differences among them. With these issues in mind, this review examines literature that investigates the purpose of elections in dictatorships; the electoral behavior of voters, candidates, and incumbents in these elections; and the link between elections and democratization. The review ends with a call to redirect the study of authoritarian elections toward uncovering and explaining the important differences among them.

ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺶ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ا دﺑﻴﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺎﺣﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎد اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻲ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺆﻃﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮم اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ، ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﺪول اﻟﻨﻔﻄﻴﺔ ﻣﺴﺮﺣًﺎ ﻟﻠﺘﻮﺳﻊ، ﺑﺨﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﻨﻈﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﺒﻨﻴﻮﻳﺔ وأﺑﻌﺎدﻫﺎ. وأوﺿﺤﺖ اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ اﻟﻔﺠﻮة ا ﻛﺎدﻳﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ أدﺑﻴﺎت اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻨﻔﻄﻴﺔ. ﻛﻤﺎ ﺣﻠﻠﺖ اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻣﺼﺎدر ﺗﻤﻮﻳﻞ اﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ، وﻧﺎﻗﺸﺖ إن ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻤﺼﺎدر ﺗ ﻌﺪّ رﻳﻌًﺎ أو ﻣﺼﺎدر ﺗﻤﻮﻳﻞ اﻋﺘﻴﺎدﻳﺔ. وأﻃﺮت اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ اﻟﻤﺼﺎدر اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ ﺑﻨﺎءً ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻨﺸﺌﻬﺎ إﻟﻰ أﻣﻮال اﻟﻤﺎﻧﺤﻴﻦ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﻴﻦ اﻟﺪاﻋﻤﺔ ﻟÝﻧﻔﺎق اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻲ، وأﻣﻮال اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺻّﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺼﻠﺔ إﺳﺮاﺋﻴﻠﻴًﺎ واﻟﺘﻲ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﺤﻮﻳﻠﻬﺎ إﻟﻰ ﺧﺰﻳﻨﺔ اﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺐ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ. وأﺧﻴﺮًا، اﻗﺘﺮﺣﺖ اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻫﻴﻜﻠﻴﺔ ﻣﻘﻮﻣﺎت اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻨﻔﻄﻴﺔ، ﻣﺴﺘﺨﺪﻣﺔ اﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﺎﻟ ﺎ. وﺗﻘﺘﺮح اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﺣﺼﺮ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻨﻔﻄﻴﺔ إﻟﻰ ﻧﻴﻮﺑﺘﺮوﻣﻨﻴﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﺮﻧﺔ؛ رﻛﻮد ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ داﺧﻠﻲ ﻳﻘﺎﺑﻠﻪ ﻧﺸﺎط ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﺧﺎرﺟﻲ، وﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎت اﻗﺘﺼﺎدﻳﺔ ﻣﻔﺮوﺿﺔ ﺧﺎرﺟﻴًﺎ، وﻧﻈﺎم ﺿﺮﻳﺒﻲ ﻫﺶ، واﻧﻌﺪام اﻻﺳﺘﻘﺮار اﻟﻤﺎﻟﻲ، واﻗﺘﺼﺎد ﻣﺘﻤﺤﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻳﻊ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻧﻤﻮذﺟًﺎ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: اﻟﺴﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ، ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺮﻳﻌﻴﺔ، اﻟﺪﻋﻢ اﻟﺪوﻟﻲ، ﻓﻠﺴﻄﻴﻦ. Tis study is a theoretical and practical precedence in conceptualizing a rentier state in Palestine. It sets the possibility for understanding the underlying principles of the performance of the Palestinian Authority (PA) since its inception in 1994. It provides a platform for utilizing rentier state theory (RST) in a non-carbon state as a framework for analysing its political economy. More profoundly, it attempts to utilize RST in understanding the sate society relation under the complex political structural reality in Palestine. Firstly, the study makes the case for the gap in literature with regards to non-carbon based rentier states. It does so by providing a short history of literature and an overview of the sub-literature that followed with regards to conditional and specialized theories on the rentier state. Secondly, it elaborates on the PA's sources of income and debates whether they are rents. It categorizes rents in the Palestinian case to include international donations to the PA, and Israeli processed and controlled clearance taxes. Both sources amount to over 70% of the PA's expenditure. Tirdly, it proposes five characteristics that exemplify the non-carbon rentier state. It proposes that flexible neopatrimonialism, external imposed economic policy, active foreign policy contrasted by inactive internal policy, fragile tax collection system and unreliable financial flows, and rentier based economy best describe the non-carbon rentier state using the PA as an example.

This paper will examine the situation which can be described as the “Blockade of Qatar”, and particularly the legal ramifications of this blockade and the avenues of action available through international law channels and intra-state apparatus. The paper is premised on the argument that the deliberate, multilateral actions taken by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt against Qatar are not only punitive, but also represent a violation of the principles of international law and of the foundations for the relations between states in times of crisis. Given the use of force to enforce the blockade, the political and economic boycott of Qatar by a group of countries in the region could be legally defined as punitive measures. This paper concludes that the actions taken by the group of countries blockading Qatar provide an adequate basis for the activation of international mechanisms for international arbitration. Specifically, the author contends that Qatar would be justified in pursuing political and judicial redress against the group of countries concerned.

The study criticizes the general framework that has governed the broader current of the researchers in civil-military relations, their method of thinking about the military institution since the inception of the field, the paper presents the theoretical and practical gaps in that literature, in particular the researchers of "Coup-Proofing". The study shows the weakness of the explanatory capabilities of the field in extrapolating and analyzing the historical era that the research seeks to reveal its theoretical and historical ambiguities, which is the phase of political pluralism in Syria between 1954 - 1958 , which the researchers viewed as a democratic phase. The paper examines why did the army step down from the presidency and allowed civil forces to engage in political action at the time, in spite of that phase is in the midst of two series of coups. The paper is based on a basic premise that the army as a military institution do represent wings, sectors, units, brigades, and power relations, before it is an expression of any other social segments, which is in contrast to what the literature says in examining the sociological backgrounds of the officers.

Despite high levels of mass mobilization in the past, Palestinian society today finds itself polarized and demobilized. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has gained control as a governing apparatus and has become increasingly authoritarian in nature. But the PA does not have complete control over the territories. This variation in control allows isolation of the effect of the PA's authoritarian nature on mobilization patterns and social dynamics. The study argues that mobilization has systematically declined in places where the PA has more direct control. Counter-intuitively, political mobilization today is more prevalent in areas under direct Israeli occupation. Findings suggest the PA has a direct role in this dynamic, using selective cooptation and repression. Overall, authoritarian strategies in the Palestinian territories have led to decreased capacity for mobilization.

Aggression is the door that lets in all other forms of crime. Therefore, it is necessary to criminalize it rather than just ban it. Although it was difficult to realize that these two goals are separately essential, they were ultimately reached through the 1945 UN Charter that banned the use of force in international relations and the 1998 Rome Statute that stated the inclusion of the crime of aggression in the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, the practice of this jurisdiction was put on hold until 2010, pending the holding of the review conference that would define aggression and the conditions of the court’s practice of its jurisdiction in this crime in compliance with the UN Charter. This alignment between the UN Charter and the amendment seems logical at first as long as it halts war. The Security Council gets to decide whether the committed act was an act of aggression and a threat to international peace and security. But, the question is the following: Did the amendment of the Rome Statute complement the relationship between the Security Council and the ICC in the field of aggression or did it entrench the council’s dominance over the court?

Palestine Over Two Months 1/9-31/10/2020