Latest Articles

The purpose of this paper is to study the Algerian experience with the Arab spring by identifying the nature of the protests movements in Algeria, to search the adaptation mechanisms of the Algerian political regime with the protest act and to answer the question: why the change in Algeria is so hard to happen? Next, this paper will expose a range of the most important political bets to understand better the Algerian exception by searching the roots of the crisis which has been overcomed in searching a radical and real reform. Finally, this paper will be concluded by addressing the prospects of political, institutional and economical changes and by exposing a future scenarios of the hard transition in light of internal and external challenges.

With the expansion of donor entities and the growth of their various activities, the questions about foreign aid and the strategic objectives behind it have become essential. This paper asks the following questions: Why do donor entities provide aid to poor countries? What are the most important objectives of these donors? Are humanitarian motives the main factor determining the conduct of donors? Theoretical and empirical studies have addressed these questions in depth from various theoretical backgrounds looking at many areas of the world, but there remains no agreement regarding the most important motives and objectives governing the conduct of donor countries in providing aid to poor countries. This paper seeks to answer these questions by reviewing, analyzing, and adapting the most important studies in international development and international relations to highlight the most important features of the global debate on this issue.

A chemical weapons attack by the Syrian regime on August 21, 2013, led to a massacre of civilians in the towns of East Ghouta and West Ghouta on the outskirts of Damascus and marked a turning point in the Syrian conflict. US President Barack Obama had previously undertaken to respond militarily if such an attack took place, provided that Congress would support such a decision. Such a direct US military intervention remained likely despite opposition among the American public and within Congress itself, up to and until a Russian proposal, quickly accepted by the Assad regime in Damascus, which would place all of Syria’s chemical weapons under international supervision before they were destroyed by Moscow. This paper examines how the Obama White House dealt with the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime. The paper also deals with declining international interest in a diplomatic resolution to the Syrian crisis, with the world community now shifting its focus from punishing the Assad regime to accepting the destruction of those weapons.

ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺶ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ "اﻟﺰام" ﺑﻤﻘﺮرات اﻟﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ اﻟﻤﺸﺘﺮك ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺼﻌﻴﺪ ا ﻣﻨﻲ، زاﻋﻤﺔ أن اﻃﺮ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﻜﺎﻓﺤﺔ ارﻫﺎب ﻣﺎ زاﻟﺖ ﻫﻲ اﺟﺪر وا ﻗﺪر ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺠﺎوز اﻟﺨﻼﻓﺎت اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻫﺬا اﻟﻨﻮع اﻟﺬي ﺿﺮب اﻟﺴﺎﺣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻣﺆﺧﺮًا وأﻓﻀﻰ إﻟﻰ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﺾ ﻗﻄﺮ ﻟﺤﺼﺎر دول ﻋﺮﺑﻴﺔ أرﺑﻊ، ﻗﻔﺰت ﻋﻠﻰ ﻫﺬه اﻃﺮ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ، وﻃﺮﺣﺖ اﺳﺘﺒﺪاﻟﻪ ﺑﺄﻃﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة، أو اﺳﺘﺪﻋﺎء أﺳﺎﻧﻴﺪ ﻣﻠﻔﻘﺔ ﻛﻞ ﻏﺎﻳﺘﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺢ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوﻋﻴﺔ ﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺤﺼﺎر. وﺗﺤﺎﺟﺞ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ ﺑﺄن اﻃﺮ اﻟﺠﺰﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺜﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ واﻟﺮﺑﺎﻋﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ اﺳﺘﺤﺪﺛﺖ ﻓﻲ ﺳﻴﺎق ازﻣﺔ، ﺳﻮاء اﺿﻄﺮارًا ﻛﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻗﻄﺮ، ﺑﺘﻮﻗﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﻣﺬﻛﺮة ﺗﻔﺎﻫﻢ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﻊ اﻟﺠﺎﻧﺐ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻲ ﺣﻮل ﺗﻤﻮﻳﻞ ارﻫﺎب؛ أو اﻧﺘﻬﺎزًا ﻟﻔﺮص اﻻﺑﺘﺰاز اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ دول اﻟﺤﺼﺎر، ﻟﻦ ﺗﻐﻨﻲ ﺑﺤﺎل ﻋﻦ اﻃﺮ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻘﻮم ﻋﻠﻰ أﺳﺎس إﻟﺰام واﻟﺘﺰام، ﻋﻠﻰ وﻓﻖ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ ﺗﺤﺘﺮم ﺳﻴﺎدة اﻟﺪول وﺗﺤﻔﺰﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺪ ﺟﺴﻮر اﻟﺘﻌﺎون. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ، ﻣﻜﺎﻓﺤﺔ ارﻫﺎب، ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﺪول اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ، ﻗﻄﺮ. This paper explores the question of adherence to commitments to joint Arab action, particularly in the security realm. The author contends that Arab cooperative frameworks for the combatting of terrorism remain the most relevant and potent force to overcome intra-Arab rivalries of the type which have most recently led a group of four Arab countries to blockade Qatar. The author further contends that piecemeal or separate bi-lateral frameworks, or even multi-lateral agreements between a number of actors—such as were in evidence during the latest Gulf Crisis—will never be a replacement for collective Arab action on these points. Such collective Arab action must be based on foundations of mutual commitment and respect for the sovereignty of the individual countries, incentivizing them to build channels of cooperation.

This study examines how international economic and political matters are interrelated within the context of the Covid- 19 pandemic's outbreak as well as its serious effects on global economy. It argues that the International Political Economy (IPE) may provide answers to how the pandemic shapes (or fails to shape) international economic relations. The paper explores how, as a transdisciplinary field, IPE helps to understand patterns of change and continuity in global economics and politics in the wake of the pandemic, and IPE's contribution to global health research as well. The study defends the hypothesis that the state has been and is still present at the heart of neoliberal capitalism, and that it has preserved its foundations within a heterodoxy neoliberal trend heading towards more authoritarian neoliberalism, and steadily moves from market to state neoliberalism. The study also advocates positioning the Political Economy of Health at the center of health research; as long as health is considered a transnational issue. It goes on to discuss the failure of international institutions to enable international cooperation to confront the pandemic, a failure forged by the rise of nationalist populism.

Title (original): Transformed by the People: Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham's Road to Power in Syria.

This report highlights some of the major milestones of the Arab democratic transition. The countries covered include Tunisia, Egypt, Libya,Syria and Yemen.

Since the publication of Horowitz's Ethnic Groups in Conflict, comparative political scientists have increasingly converged on their classification of ethnic identities. But there is no agreement on the definition that justifies this classification— and the definitions that individual scholars propose do not match their classifications. I propose a definition that captures the conventional classification of ethnic identities in comparative political science to a greater degree than the alternatives. According to this definition, ethnic identities are a subset of identity categories in which membership is determined by attributes associated with, or believed to be associated with, descent (described here simply as descent-based attributes). I argue, on the basis of this definition, that ethnicity either does not matter or has not been shown to matter in explaining most outcomes to which it has been causally linked by comparative political scientists. These outcomes include violence, democratic stability, and patronage.

This study reassesses the experience of political openness in Algeria within the analytical and explanatory categories of political economy. It is built on the premise that the transition from a totalitarian authoritarian regime to a democratic one presupposes the transition from a rentier economy linked to the external market and dominated by rentier groups, to a productive economy based on the national bourgeoisie exploitation of local labour to create wealth. The study argues that the experience of democratic transition in Algeria faltered due to the failure of the rentier groups to undergo capitalist transformation that could have allowed the emergence of the two main sides of the democratic equation: the bourgeoisie and the working class. The political elites that control the rentier economy were willing to accept political but not economic reforms that could have led to a reconsideration of the hegemonic relations within society and liberated it from the grip of power. In this regard, the failure of the economic reforms introduced by the Hamrouche government (1989 - 1991) was a prelude to the disruption of the democratic transition and prevention of the development of a civil society capable of gaining its independence from authority and, on the other hand, the independence of the Algerian state from the global market.

​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.