Latest Articles

This study aims to define the interests and goals of the United States in the Arab region by answering two main questions: how does the Obama administration differ from its predecessors in view of its promises of change, particularly following the tragic transformations raging in the Arab region at present? And to what extent does the strategy of this administration reflect its public diplomacy regarding democracy, freedom, and justice in the region? The study explains how Obama raised the ceiling of expectations when he did not limit his promises to a change in American policy only, but included putting an end to the mentality that had pushed the United States into war. Despite the difference in style and method between the Obama and Bush Junior administrations, the overall goals and the regional strategy can be summarized in terms of three key interests: the priority of ensuring free access to energy supplies in the region; maintaining American supremacy over all other global powers; and the containment of all Arab objections to ensure the dominance of the US strategic agenda in the Arab region, including the guarantee of Israel's security.

Cyber-attacks are considered a new battlefield to be added to the list of conventional threats facing the world. This paper analyzes this growing phenomenon of internet cyber-attacks and sheds more light on the virtual world. The dimensions and effects of this threat transcend political and geographic borders, and its repercussions jeopardize states’ national security and biosecurity. The study exposes issues and consequences of hacking and cracking operations initiated by internet pirates or hackers and “anonymous” groups. The study also touches on the reach of this virtual world that has overcome distances and that should be taken as a guiding light to better address the new threats of this phenomenon on real life.

This study advances a new approach to theorizing the Arab state after the popular uprisings. It does this in two steps. Suspending the western European model of state formation and bringing the Arab world's experience in conversation with other parts of the Global South, it examines alternative state formation and state building sequences, trajectories, and temporalities in the making of Arab states. It thus historicizes the process of state formation and state building in the Arab world as compared to the western European one and other regions in the Global South. This first step liberates us from explicit and implicit comparisons with the European model of state formation. The second step surveys alternative theorizations of the Arab state after the uprisings. Tracing the causal assumptions embedded in these theories reveals how much they rely on the European model of state formation and state building as an implicit point of analytic departure and critical comparison. This survey unpacks the assumptions these theories make about the state, the difference between states and regimes, state and non-state actors, the private and public realms, and the formal and informal sectors. The objective of this study is to not only de-exceptionalize states in the Arab world, but, more importantly, borrowing from Gurminder Bhambra, 'unmake' our understandings of state formation and state building in the Arab world and thus contribute, following Walter Mignolo, to a knowledge production that serves a form of 'epistemic reconstitution' of alternative historical trajectories and possibilities.

ﺗﺮﺻﺪ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ ﻓﻮﺿﻰ اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻒ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ا زﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ إﻃﺎر ﺻﺮاع اﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﻛﻤﺔ واﻟﺒﻴﺖ اﺑﻴﺾ. وﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻧﺤﻴﺎز اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺲ ا ﻣﻴﺮﻛﻲ دوﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ إﻟﻰ دول اﻟﺤﺼﺎر ارﺑﻊ ﺿﺪ ﻗﻄﺮ، وﺗﺸﺠﻴﻌﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳﺘﻤﺮار ﻧﻬﺠﻬﺎ وﻋﺮﻗﻠﺔ ﺟﻬﺪ اﻟﻮﺳﺎﻃﺔ، ﻓﺈن اﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﻛﻤﺔ - ﻓﻲ ﻇﻞ ﺳﻌﻴﻬﺎ ﻟﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ اﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ اﻟﻘﻮﻣﻴﺔ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺸﺮق ا وﺳﻂ، وﺗﺤﺪﻳﺪًا اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ - ﻛﺎن ﻟﻬﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻠﻤﻮس ﻓﻲ ا زﻣﺔ؛ ﻓﻘﺪ اﺳﺘﻄﺎﻋﺖ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﺼﺮﻳﺤﺎت واﺟﺮاءات أﺣﻴﺎﻧ ﺎ اﺳﺘﻌﺎدة زﻣﺎم اﻟﻤﺒﺎدرة وﻣﻨﻊ ﺗﺪﻫﻮر اوﺿﺎع ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ أو ﻣﻨﻊ اﻻﺗ ﺠﺎه ﻧﺤﻮ ﺳﻴﻨﺎرﻳﻮﻫﺎت ﺗﺼﻌﻴﺪﻳّﺔ. وﺗﺨﻠﺺ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ إﻟﻰ أن ﻓﻮﺿﻰ اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻒ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ ﺗﻌﻮد إﻟﻰ ﻓﻘﺪان اﻟﺮؤﻳﺔ اﻟﻮاﺿﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻴﺔ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻬﺪ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ؛ اﻣﺮ اﻟﺬي ﻳﻀﻊ اﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ أﻣﺎم ﺗﺤﺪﻳﺎت ﺟﺴﺎم، ﺑﺴﺒﺐ ﻋﺪم ﻛﻔﺎءة اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺲ، واﺳﺘﻨﺎده إﻟﻰ ﻣﺴﻮﻏﱢﺎت أﻳﺪﻳﻮﻟﻮﺟﻴﺔ، ﻓﻀﻠ ﺎ ﻋﻦ ﺣﺴﺎﺑﺎت، وﺧﺼﻮﻣﺎت ﺷﺨﺼﻴّﺔ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ، ﺣﺼﺎر ﻗﻄﺮ، ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ. This paper traces the evolution of the official stance of the US establishment, including the White House, towards the 2017 intra-Gulf crisis. While the president's seeming bias in favor of the four countries leading the blockade on Qatar served to make them more intransigent and less amenable to various attempts at mediation, other organs of the US establishment were quick to move to try to contain the excesses of statements made by Trump and limit the fallout of the crisis. The author concludes that the disarray in the American approach to the Gulf crisis is a reflection of the lack of a clear vision of what US foreign policy ought to be under the Trump presidency. Coupled with the inexperience of President Trump, his personal vendettas and his reliance on ideological gimmicks, this reality foretells huge challenges for US interests around the world.

Examined in this article are a number of aspects of Tunisia's 2014 constitution, specifically, the relationship between the presidency and the parliament; the status of the newly created constitutional court; the higher judicial council; constitutional controls and restrictions; the role of religion and the status of women in the new constitution; and administrative decentralization within the constitution. Adopting a comparative approach, the author examines each of these topics in their proper regional and historical context. This allows for a clearer understanding of what factors have allowed Tunisia's constitutional politics to advance so quickly when compared to other states in the region. Through successful dialogue, the Tunisian people were able to prove that ideological differences do not necessarily lead to conflict or stagnation. The author further argues that the pragmatic approach of Tunisian parties to the national dialogue provided a model of conflict resolution to be emulated across the globe.

Current Russian policy is based on a nationalism that rests on state capitalism, and that speaks to nationalist sentiment built on the rejection of Western exploitation. This patriotic nationalist position becomes evident through the lack of any ideologically derived principles driving Russia’s position: state interests including national security are what drive current policy. The drivers for this new Russian policy mean that Russia can simultaneously suppress a separatist movement by armed force in one region and champion another separatist movement with armed force in another. In this sense, the Russian Federation has no fixed positions but only fixed interests, and even its interests can change. In Syria, critics suggest that the proximate aim of Russia’s policy is to defend the Assad regime, Moscow’s ally, from collapse. Saving the regime is not, however, an end in itself. Rather, it is a means of self-assertion and another step toward the goal of becoming a global superpower, this time in the Middle East. If the Syrian regime believes its rescue is the exclusive objective of Russia’s intervention, it is wrong. The exertion of Russian influence will at most provide a temporary respite. The mere fact of Russia’s military presence in Syria means that the regime is no longer master of its own destiny and no longer even a player on the international stage, since Russia is now its proxy at any international negotiations.

This paper explores Arab public attitudes towards the proliferation of nuclear weapons across the Middle East. The results of the Arab Opinion Index presented here indicate that a majority of the Arab public has an in-principle opposition to the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Nonetheless, there are important caveats to this opposition: Israel’s present-day monopoly of nuclear weapons is a limiting factor to this principled opposition. Respondents to the survey, who also overwhelmingly view Israel as the country which poses the single greatest to regional security, contend that Israeli possession of nuclear weapons justifies other states in the region seeking to obtain them.

Examining the Egypt's military coup against an elected president on July 3 2013, this paper compares these summer events with similar experiences of countries that were also in the early stages of democratic development, including Venezuela in 2002 and Algeria in 1992. It looks in particular at the relationships between the "deep state," the "street," and the media in shaping the course of a coup's aftermath. In Egypt, the paper shows, it was the alliance liberal and secular forces with private media companies as well as military institution's reliance on its "deep state" network, which played a central role in mobilizing the street against the elected president Mohamed Morsi. This led to a counterrevolution that brought the tyrannical state and its figures back to power. Reading into the post-coup models Egypt's internal circumstances, regional situation, and the nature of the organization itself (different in many respects from the nature of the Islamist political movement that went through the same experience in Algeria), the paper draws out possible scenarios for the future of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

ﺗﺴﻠﻂ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺮاﻛﺰ اﻟﺒﺤﻮث واﻟﻤﻨﺎﺑﺮ اﻋﻼﻣﻴﺔ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺔ ﻟ{ﻓﻜﺎر واﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻼت اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎن ﻟﻬﺎ دور ﺣﺎﺳﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻨﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻴﺔ، واﻟﻤﻨﺎخ اﻟﺬي أﺷﺎﻋﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ "ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ". وﺗﺒﻴﻦ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﺴﻤﺎت ا ﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺬه اﻟﻜﺘﺎﺑﺎت ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺎل اﻟﺘﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻨﻊ اﻟﻘﺮار اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻲ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻲ، ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺘﻨﺎول اﻟﻌﻨﺎﺻﺮ اﻟﻔﻜﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺑﺎﺗﺖ ادارة اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺗﺴﺘﻠﻬﻢ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻌﻀ ﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻠﻘﺎﺗﻬﺎ اﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ إزاء اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﻗﻄﺮ، ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﺟﺮى اﻟﺘﺮﻛﻴﺰ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻪ ﻣﺎ داﻣﺖ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﻓﻲ دورﻫﺎ ﻣﺼﺪرًا ﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺎت ارﻫﺎﺑﻴﺔ واﻟﻤﺘﻄﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺸﺮق اوﺳﻂ، وﺗﺠﻴّﺮ ﻗﻮﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﻨﺎﻋﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ اﺳﻼم اﻟﺮادﻳﻜﺎﻟﻲ، ﻓﻤﻦ اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮل ﻃﺮح اﻟﺴﺆال إن ﻛﺎن ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻴًﺎ اﺳﺘﻤﺮار إدارة دوﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ ﻓﻲ "اﺳﺘﺌﺠﺎر أﺻﻮل" ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﺗﺆﻳﺪ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻄﺒﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ اﺳﻼم. واﻟﻬﺪف، ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺤﺎﺟﺞ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ، ﻫﻮ أن ﺗﺒﻘﻰ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﺤﺖ اﻟﻤﺠﻬﺮ، ﻣﻜﺒّﻠﺔ اﻟﻴﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﻦ اﻟﺘﺤﺮك وﻓﺎﻗﺪة اﻟﻤﺒﺎدرة، وﻓﻲ اﻧﺘﻈﺎر ﺳﺎﻛﻦ ﺧﺎرج ﺣﻠﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﺴﺮح اﻗﻠﻴﻤﻲ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ﻗﻄﺮ، ﻣﺮاﻛﺰ اﻟﺒﺤﻮث اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ، ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ. This paper highlights US research centers and platforms producing ideas and literatures that have played a crucial role in shaping US foreign policy and the climate that has shaped it in the formation of the "Trump's World", and outlines the main features of these writings in influencing US foreign policy-making. Furthermore, the paper discusses the intellectual elements that the current US administration is drawing form some of its basic premises on the attitude towards Qatar. These writings emphasizes that as long as Qatar continues to play its role as a source of funding for terrorist and extremist groups in the Middle East, the question raises weather Tramp administration would continue to "lease assets" from a country that supported such a version of Islam, but the goal is to keep Qatar inactive and waiting outside the regional theater.

Israel is following the strategic changes in the region arising from the Arab revolutions with great anxiety. It is aware that its chances to control the process of change underway, and all the changes arising from it, are limited. Despite this, it is trying its utmost to minimize the negative effects of these changes on its standing in the region. This article deals with Israeli positions towards these geostrategic changes, foremost among them the fall of a number of dictatorial regimes, some of which Israel relied upon to guarantee its security. The establishment of democratic regimes in a number of Arab states threatens to disrupt the balance that was tipped in favor of Israel's security. Examined in this study is the decline of American influence in the Arab region, the prospect of change in Israeli-American relations, as well as the possibility of Israel losing its monopoly over non-conventional weapons because of the Arab Spring. To conclude, a review of the Israeli position on the revolution in Syria is also offered.