Latest Articles

This article draws from structurationist and symbolic interactionist sociology, seeking to build a bridge between the realist–liberal and rationalist–reflectivist debates in the field of international relations. In doing so, it argues against the neorealist claim that self-help is given by anarchic structure exogenously to process. It further argues that self-help and power politics do not follow either logically or causally from the anarchic structure of the international system, but are generated by process rather than by structure. There is no logic of anarchy apart from the practices that create and instantiate one particular structure of identities and interests rather than another. Self-help and power politics are institutions, not essential features of anarchy – anarchy is what states make of it. The article explores three ways in which identities and interests are transformed under anarchy: by the institution of sovereignty, by an evolution of cooperation, and by intentional efforts to transform egoistic identities into collective identities.

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.

This book examines the political, economic, historical, cultural, and linguistic relations between GCC countries and the Horn of Africa, highlighting the region's strategic significance to the Gulf.

Media studies remains the weakest link in political and social research dealing with the Arab region. The research that exists in this discipline remains limited in terms of research questions, restricted in some form to the question of freedom, and set in a defensive position lacking any originality. This study sheds light on the political press, focusing on the Moroccan Francophone journal, Le journal, issued from 1997-2010. The study aims to provide a new conceptual approach to the power of the media that crystallized within the framework of a network of interdependent concepts. These include the concepts of efficiency, independence and leadership. The study hypothesizes that epistemological-methodological liberalization evades the dominant reading of freedom adopted by both journalists and researchers in foreign and Western research on Arab media.

This study deals with transnational Shiism and the dynamics of relations between the Shiʿi religious establishment and the post-colonial state in Iraq. It sheds light on two aspects of transnational Shiism. First, the evolution and internal dynamics of religious authority, especially in terms of adapting its transnational domain to the Iraqi national context. The study argues that the relationship between Shiʿi religious establishment and the state was often characterized by tension, as the state sought to consolidate its power within its borders. Yet, after 2003, the nature of relations between the two has significantly changed, leading to new configurations of authority. Second, the increasing polarization between activist transnational Shiism, which is today led by the Iranian state, and Iraq-centric Shiism became a key factor in shaping power relations in post-2003 Iraq.

​The fall of authoritarian regimes across the Arab region has uncovered a range of structural fissures within Arab society, unleashing unprecedented, pernicious exploitation of identity politics adopted by a range of local and international actor. Today, sectarian prejudice and stereotypes have seeped into not only the media in the Arab region, but also its academic discourse.

Illegal immigration is one of the key threats faced by European countries mid-way through the first decade of the new millennium. The continued flow of vast numbers of migrants by both legal and illegal means has triggered phobias and racism in European societies. European governments have tried to deal with the issue by taking a security approach, recruiting all possible manner of oppressive police methods and deterrence laws to tackle the phenomenon. The issue of migration has now become fully 'securitized.' The migration issue began as the result of several internal and external factors. The external factors included the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2011 and their role in promoting accusations of terrorisms against Muslims, who account for a large proportion of migrants bound for Europe. Internal factors include exploitation of the migration phenomenon by far-right parties that seek to link migration to negative phenomena like organized crime and terrorism. This had a correspondingly negative effect on the rights of migrants, which are stipulated in international conventions and treaties. Foremost of these is the right to political asylum, an essential right that has since come under severe restriction by European countries that seek to fully eliminate it. Securitizing migration has also impacted relations between migrants and host societies, which have grown increasingly xenophobic, rejecting everything foreign and rallying around nationalist slogans, giving credence to claims of a 'clash of civilization.

Since the time of President Thomas Jefferson, and on through the presidents of the 20th century, the United States has talked about itself as the propagator, protector, and defender of democracy around the world. Yet America has never showed any qualms of forming military and political alliances with authoritarian regimes in Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. The US justifies these international alliances on the basis that “not all dictatorships in the world are enemies of the United States, but all the United States’ enemies are dictatorships.” The US therefore adopted a two-track diplomacy: while working to spread democracy (directly or by means of international organizations and NGOs) the US has no issue in supporting autocratic governments when its interests are involved. How did US policy apply to the democratic transformation in the former Eastern bloc states in Europe on the eve of the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and subsequently, when American values and interests went hand in hand, and how did it then apply to the Arab Spring of 2011, when US values and interests were congruent in some cases and out of sync in others, according to the situation in each country and its strategic importance from America’s perspective? What are the results of these policies and what differences emerge from such a comparison of the Arab and East Europe cases.

Book Title: The Hashemite Arab Federation in British Documents: The Complete Official British Archive on the Hashemite Federation between Iraq and Jordan 1958 [Arabic]