Latest Articles

This study discusses the institutional legacy of economic liberalization policies in shaping the contemporary reality of civil-military relations in Arab Spring states, and the future challenges of democratic transformation in these countries. It argues that economic openness through the application of liberalization policies has led to the emergence of a military oligarchy operating under a civilian cover, formally extending the dominance of the Arab armies from the political to the economic sphere. The outcome of this dynamic was the consolidation of the positions and political dominance of the military, which poses great challenges to the future of democratic transition in these countries. The study reviews its hypothesis through the cases of Egypt, Tunisia, Sudan and Algeria, and draws analytical comparisons between them.

The premise of this study is the belief that there is a crisis in contemporary liberal democracy resulting from the tension between two traditions: one democratic and the other liberal. The spread of right-wing populism in the West is not a new phenomenon, but rather a new manifestation of what may be called a permanent crisis of democracy. The study distinguishes populism from totalitarian ideological movements that gain popular support through demagogy and incitement against the other and reviews existing tensions in the structure of liberal democracy. The paper finds that populist rhetoric is channeled through tensions in the structure of liberal democracy and translates social anger into criticism of the democratic system itself, by using one component of a complex democratic system against another.

This research tried to explore different stages of the Zionist "penetration" of British political circles, and to identify the strategies and tactics, which were employed by the "Zionist lobby" organisations in order to win over the British public. The focus of this research was on the Zionist lobby organisations’ methods in Britain, where pro-Israel organisations run "soft" and "hard" pressure tools including publicity, propaganda, direct advertising, editorial advertising, public relations, and funding, to influence the attitude of the British public. The research found that the the pro-Israel lobby had intensified its activities in the last decade, to counter a British public opinion that appeared to have become more sympathetic and understanding of the Palestinian narrative.

​In this interview, Cheikh Rached Ghannouchi recounts his experiences of working with his “brothers” in the Ennahda movement,who, he claims, criticized his “ad hominem” attacks on ousted president Benali, in contrast to party policy—at the time—which forbade direct criticism of the former president. Cheikh Ghannouchi also reasserts his previous position that Islamists should avoid taking the reins of power—even when they win elections. This is to acknowledge, he says, the regional and global orders whichs imply would not tolerate Islamists in power.

Book Title: Abdullah Gul and the Making of the New Turkey [English] Author: Gerald MacLean Year of publication: 2014 Publisher: One World - London Pages: 368 (large format)

The revolutions in the MENA region were accompanied by many political shifts. These, in turn, led to what might be called primary outcomes; produced before the revolutions have come to an end. These outcomes came as the result of an absence of leaders once described as historical and eternal, and to the leadership of opposing political forces in some of MENA countries. These forces, as the shifts and struggles in the nations of the region continue, are leading political decisions in the wake of the fall of the dictators that seem to enforce marginalization and exclusion. However, these fateful shifts were not the only path available, as seen in the region’s history. Morocco is one example of a country that faced a different political reality, with many observers noting that the monarchy in Morocco- contrary to what some circles expected- became stronger after the Arab Spring.

This study provides a reading of the implications and significance of the most recent Iranian presidential election results in light of the available numerical data. It analyses the cultural, political, and economic factors that shaped Iranian mentality within both opposition and loyalist circles. The study discusses the challenges facing the new president, Hassan Rouhani, and examines part of the political struggle over the concept of “moderation” chosen by Rouhani as a motto for his term in office. The study finds that the election results confirm the Iranian political arena’s continued reliance on the old approach in the management of its conflicts. It expects the debate over moderation to be settled in practical terms through the new government’s political performance. Settling this debate will have a huge impact on Rouhani’s relationship with Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei and influential forces in the regime, on one hand, and with loyalist and opposition political currents on the other. As such, the practical answer to the question of “moderation” will remain the determining factor for the course and outcome of Rouhani’s presidential experiment.

This study addresses a manifestation of the crisis within contemporary Arab political theory by examining the status of justice and analyzing the methodologies employed by selected theorists in constructing their political visions relative to this concept. We highlight the importance of a philosophical perspective and the imperative for political thought to confront aspects of this crisis. The central thesis defended here posits the necessity of shifting the discourse on justice from an abstract, transcendental perspective, often encapsulated by the question, what is justice? towards a relative vision. This alternative vision considers how justice, as a value, becomes embedded within Arab moral and political consciousness. Such a reorientation requires recognizing the significance of justice, its cultural contextualization, and its integral relationship with the concept of justification.

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.

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.