Latest Articles

The notions of superpower and unipolarity are seriously questioned by heavy trends: non-fungibility and dissemination of power; complexity of transnational interactions and interdependencies. The article argues that because of these mutations, China's rise, achieving the rank of "emerging potential superpower", and the narrowing of the gape on global power resources, the United State, who still have unmatched capacity, will probably be the last superpower in a Cold war era sense. The article concludes that unipolarity is not challenged because the operating interstate dynamics, in which involved actors which are supposed to work for building a multipolar world, contribute in fact to reproducing unipolarity.

عنوان الكتاب: فيروس كورونا والنظام العالمي: مستقبل الصراع والتنافس والتعاون عنوان الكتاب بلغته الأصلية: Covid-19 and World Order: The Future of Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation. المحرران: هال براندز وفرانسيس غافين .Hal Brands & Francis J. Gavin (eds.) الناشر: مطبعة جامعة جونز هوبكينز .Johns Hopkins University Press مكان النشر: بالتيمور/ مريلاند .Baltimore, Maryland سنة النشر: 2020. عدد الصفحات: 472 صفحة.

​عقد المركز العربي للأبحاث ودراسة السياسات مؤتمره السنوي في قضايا التحول الديمقراطي في الوطن العربي، في مقر معهد الدوحة للدراسات العليا، حول موضوع "الجيش والسياسة في مرحلة التحول الديمقراطي في الوطن العربي". وبهذا يكون المؤتمر قد انعقد خمس دورات، منذ أول مرة عقد فيها؛ إذ بحثت دورته الأولى في موضوع "الإسلاميون ونظام الحكم الديمقراطي: تجارب واتجاهات" )تشرين الأول/ أكتوبر 2012 ، وتناولت ثانيتُها موضوع "الإسلاميون ونظام الحكم الديمقراطي: مسائل المواطنة والدولة والأمة"أيلول/ سبتمبر 2013، وبحثت ثالثتُها في "المسألة الطائفية وصناعة الأقليات في المشرق العربي الكبير" في البحر الميت/ الأردن )أيلول/ سبتمبر 2014 وناقشت رابعتُها "العنف والسياسة في المجتمعات العربية" في تونس أيلول/ سبتمبر 2015.

ﺗﺴﻠﻂ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﺪدات اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﺔ ﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻒ ﺛﻼث دول ﻋﺮﺑﻴﺔ؛ ﻫﻲ اﻟﺴﻮدان واﻟﻤﻐﺮب واﻟﺼﻮﻣﺎل، ﻣﻦ ا زﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ اﻟﺮاﻫﻨﺔ. وﻟﻢ ﻳﺄت اﺧﺘﻴﺎر ﻫﺬه اﻟﺪول ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺼﺎدﻓﺔ، ﺑﻞ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻌﻮاﻣﻞ؛ أﺑﺮزﻫﺎ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎت اﻟﻮﺛﻴﻘﺔ واﻟﻤﻤﻴﺰة ﻟﻬﺎ ﺑﺄﺣﺪ ﻃﺮﻓﻲ ازﻣﺔ، وﺳﻌﻲ اﻟﺪول ارﺑﻊ اﻟﻤﺤﺎﺻِ ﺮة ﻻﺟﺘﺬاﺑﻬﺎ إﻟﻰ ﺻﻔﻬﺎ، ﺿﻤﻦ ﻧﻬﺞ دﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻲ ﻗﺎدﺗﻪ اﻟﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ، ﻳﺮﻣﻲ إﻟﻰ ﻋﺰل دوﻟﺔ ﻗﻄﺮ ﻋﺮﺑﻴًﺎ ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪًا ﻟﻌﺰﻟﻬﺎ دوﻟﻴًﺎ. وﻣﺎ أﻋﻄﻰ ﻻﺧﺘﻴﺎرﻧﺎ أﻫﻤﻴﺔ، رﻓﺾ اﻟﺪول اﻟﺜﻼث، ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻏﺮاءات واﻟﻀﻐﻮط، ﻣﺴﺎﻳﺮةَ دول اﻟﺤﺼﺎر ﻓﻲ ﺧﻄﻮاﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﺘﺼﻌﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﺿﺪ ﻗﻄﺮ، واﺗﺨﺬت اﻟﺤﻴﺎد اﻳﺠﺎﺑﻲ اﻟﺪاﻋﻲ إﻟﻰ ﺣﻞ اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼت اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺮق اﻟﺴﻠﻤﻴﺔ، ﻣﻦ دون اﻟﻠﺠﻮء إﻟﻰ آﻟﻴﺎت ﺗﻌﺴﻔﻴﺔ، ﻛﻨﻬﺞ اﻟﺤﺼﺎر اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻲ واﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎدي اﻟﻤﺘﺒﻊ ﺣﺎﻟﻴًﺎ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ، اﻟﺴﻮدان، اﻟﻤﻐﺮب، اﻟﺼﻮﻣﺎل، أرض اﻟﺼﻮﻣﺎل. This paper explores the positions of three Arab states: Morocco, Sudan and Somalia towards the present crisis in intra-Gulf relations. The choice of these three Arab countries in Africa was deliberate, a result of the strong bilateral bonds which tie each of them to Qatar, a party to the conflict. It is also true that the countries presently leading a blockade on Qatar, led by Saudi Arabia, sought to coerce these three countries to similarly cut off ties with Qatar, part of an effort to isolate Doha on the Arab regional stage before seeking to isolate the country globally. More importantly, each of these three countries opted to pursue a path of "positive impartiality", remaining firm in the face of financial and political inducements from the countries leading the blockade on Qatar to join their effort.

Eastern Sudan is in a critical stage, where local fault lines intersect with Horn of Africa tensions and regional and international ambitions. This study traces those fissures and their intersections in order to understand and analyze the conflict in the region. Its basic premise is that eastern Sudan represents the priority and geographical entry point in the Sudanese peace-building process, and that the establishment/strengthening of peace in this region is linked to a reciprocal relationship with the security and stability of the Horn of Africa. The study presents preliminary ideas, in terms of preventive diplomacy, that may contribute to healing the rifts. It is based on a combination of primary sources, literature, and personal interviews with Sudanese academics, diplomats and other actors. In addition, it builds on the outputs of two workshops from the Sudan Track II Peace Dialogue Project. It frames some aspects of the analysis and ideas presented with a set of theories and hypotheses that intersect with the field of conflict studies, following the "combined approach," for studying complex conflict environments.

The wave of democracy, peaceful or violent, has up till now dispelled many of the illusions prevalent in the West, in Europe especially, including so-called "Arab exceptionalism"—that is the notion that Arabs are not interested in democracy, are indifferent to whether it is present in their lives or not, and are basically not ready for it. A second dismantled illusion is that of the "good dictator" that is based on the claim that dictators loyal to the West are a better bet than the Islamist alternative. A third illusion concerns the idea that the Arab world is itself a construct and that the attractiveness of a supranational Arab identity has gone. The Arab revolutions, however, have proved the above theories wrong. It is not a coincidence that the wave for change broke out in a number of Arab states at the same time and in the same fashion with more or less the same slogans shouted out in the same language, and were able in a very short time to bring down four regimes. The Arab revolutions took academic circles by surprise and made some academics claim that understanding the future of Middle East politics required that academics carry out a serious reassessment of the restored importance of Pan-Arab identity.

The struggle for political legitimacy has been central to political polarization in Egypt since the 2013 coup. Given the regime's pronounced authoritarian features, the traditional form of legal electoral legitimacy proved insufficient and ineffective. As a result, the regime adopted alternative strategies to reinforce its political legitimacy. Drawing on theories of political legitimacy and literature on citizenship in authoritarian regimes, this study explores the measures and practices implemented by the July 2013 regime to achieve legitimacy across its three dimensions: the system's effectiveness and competence, citizens' beliefs in its legitimacy, and their behaviours that signal recognition.

An analysis of the strategic documents produced by the United States can play a significant role in understanding the comprehensive visions of successive administrations in dealing with the outside world. However, these documents cannot present a day-to-day picture of what a given administration might do amid rapidly evolving crises. In analyzing each document, these day-to-day strategic concerns, which in fact govern each US strategic document, must be taken into account. This study attempts to analyze the text of the 2015 UN national security strategy by taking into account the international context, its goals, priorities, and governing principles. The analysis carries out an assessment of six key strategic indicators in the strategy document, as well as nine indicators of change compared to the 2010 document. This paints a picture of the larger vision of the Obama administration and the White House, which will shape US foreign and security policy until the end of his term.

The literature on state capacity is often at odds with what constitutes state capacity, how to operationalize it, and how to measure it. Nevertheless, it is important for us to attempt this endeavor given the importance of state capacity, and its effect on a number of political and social dynamics. With the proliferation of quality surveys in the Arab world in recent years, we also have an unprecedented opportunity to examine state capacity in a new light, according to citizen perceptions in addition to material measures. Thus, in this paper I will examine variations of state capacity measurements using the Arab Opinion Index data. I will provide evidence to show that many political phenomena can only be understood if the conditions surrounding state capacity are accounted for.

​The study is premised on the assumption that the US-Iranian tensions under the Trump administration represents a new chapter in the crisis in the US-Iranian relationship. This extreme hostility was related to US domestic politics and the bordering on personal rivalry of President Trump with his predecessor, President Barack Obama, in domestic and foreign policy. One of the most important policy manifestations of this administrative divergence concerns the Nuclear Agreement with Iran, signed in 2015. Opposition to the Nuclear Agreement united Gulf players such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, who considered shared hostility towards Iran as a bridge to strengthen their relations with the US on the one hand; while also forming a strong front, in the presence of Israel, to weaken the Iranian regime without necessarily replacing it.