Latest Articles

Donald Trump's election as President of the United States came as a surprise for many. His positions on international trade, climate change, the future of the EU, NATO, and relations with Russia have sent shockwaves throughout the western world. Although these ideas never constituted a coherent philosophy, if transformed into policy directions, they would threaten the very foundations of the Liberal World Order as commonly understood today. Even if Trump does not act on the most radical pledges made during his election campaign, by positioning himself as the antithesis of the Obama administration he would still bring notable change to US foreign policy. The extent of that chage is now open to question as leaders and publics around the world are bracing themselves for what comes next.

This article discusses the nuclear program agreement reached between the P5+1 group of nations and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The article sees the agreement as a historic achievement that may well have major effects in the region. The paper deals with the main features of the agreement and the circumstances that led to it, and enumerates its likely effects on the region and especially on the Palestine-Israel conflict, as well as Israel’s frustration with the Iranian nuclear program and its threats to strike it. The paper puts forth the possibility that the agreement will lead to positive results and cause stability in the region and lead to real improvement in Iranian-Gulf relations, particularly with Saudi Arabia, as well as resolve the problems of Shia minorities in some Gulf states.

The Iranian nuclear agreement was the result of a pressing domestic need. This paper discusses the factors that pushed Iran to sign a nuclear deal and argues that the circumstances under which Hassan Rouhani became Iranian president meant he had to achieve a political détente in foreign relations within 100 days in office. Moreover, this pressing détente had to address the issue of sanctions. The successive rounds of US and Western sanctions drained the “resistance economy” and pushed it to resort to “heroic flexibility in diplomacy” whose lines were drawn by Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei. This paved the way for a change in politicians’ rhetoric and performance vis-à-vis relations with the US.

Forty days after the outbreak of the Yemeni Revolution, on March 21, 2011, General Ali Mohsen Saleh al-Ahmar (commander of the northwestern military district and the 1st Armoured Division), Major General Mohammad Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar (commander of the eastern military district) and a number of commanders of other military units declared their support for the revolution. The Yemeni army divided into two: “supporters of the revolution army” and the “family army,” according to the characterization by the forces of the revolution. This development exposed to the public the hidden divisions within the structure of the Yemeni Army, taking it to the point of no return. The capital Sanaa and some other Yemeni cities witnessed limited armed confrontations between the two armies and between the militias supported by them. That is why the executive mechanism of The Gulf Cooperation Council’s initiative (the Gulf Initiative) included a special term for uniting the army, restructuring it, and ending its division. With the split as its background and the Gulf Initiative as its point of departure, this paper aims to show what was achieved in terms of restructuring the army. It describes the course of this restructuring operation, the difficulties it entailed, the tasks that have not yet been accomplished, as well as its impact on national unity, social integration, and confidence-building between the parties participating in the national dialogue conference.

This study explores the relationship and reciprocal influence between the political authority in Iran, led by the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and the religious authority in Najaf, led by the Grand Ayatollah and marja', Ali al-Sistani. Rather than focusing exclusively on jurisprudential/ideological doctrines, the paper approaches the subject from a perspective that emphasizes the interactive relationship between the structure and the agency. It suggests that the emergence of the Islamic regime in Iran, based on the principle of Willayat Al-Faqih, had a significant impact on reshaping power relations in the Shi'i theological space and the response of Shi'i religious actors. At the same time, the practices adopted by al-Sistani in Iraq after 2003 , the context he was responding to, and the emergence of the Marji ʿ yya as an extraconstitutional actor, allowed for the formation of an alternative transitional model, which I term a "neo-traditional authority". The study argues for an alternative to two theses: first, the potential decline of the traditional Marji ʿ yya due to the dominance of the Willayat Al-Faqih in Iran, put forward in particular by Mehdi Khalaji, and second, the superiority and continuity of the traditional Marji ʿ yya due to its depoliticization, contended by Linda Wallbridge. The paper also maintains that there is an interpretive framework that meets the two theses in the middle, represented by the rise of the neo-traditional Marji ʿ yya and the possibility it will emerge as an alternative model in the future.

An agreement signed by the Russian Foreign Minister and his US counterpart in Moscow has taken observers by surprise due to its timing and the surrounding circumstances. The agreement in Moscow was the natural culmination of a series of events impacting the situation in Syria, including changes to the composition of Barack Obama’s Administration and an overall shift in American attitudes towards the Arab Spring. This has presaged a change in American vision towards its interests in the wider Middle East region and Washington’s relations with both regional powers and global players with influence on the Syrian conflict. Finally, the agreement can be regarded as an expression of American uncertainty, as well as the Obama Administration’s inability to formulate a coherent policy towards Syria two years into the revolution.

By making use of the data provided by the Arab Opinion Index during the periods 20172018- and 20192020-, a survey implemented by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in 13 Arab countries, this paper deals with Arab public opinion towards Iran in two periods – before and after 2011 – based on an analysis of survey respondents' views of Iranian foreign policy, as conveyed in their answers. It answers a set of sub-questions: How has Iran's involvement in Syria and Yemen affected its image in the Arab world? Is Iran seen as a threat in the Arab world? Did Iran's policy towards Palestine contribute to improving its image in the Arab world? Are sectarian goals seen to be driving Iran's foreign policy towards the Arab world?

ﺗﺮﺻﺪ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﺗﺠﺎﻫﺎت اﻟﺮأي اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﺴﻌﻮدي ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﻀﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺴﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ وﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ اﻻﻋﺘﺮاف ﺑﺈﺳﺮاﺋﻴﻞ، اﺳﺘﻨﺎدا إﻟﻰ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﻤﺆﺷﺮ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ ﻟﻠﻌﺎم 2016. وﺗﺄﺗﻲ أﻫﻤﻴﺔ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﻲ ﺿﻮء اﻟﺘﻄﻮرات واﻟﻤﺴﺘﺠﺪات اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺸﻬﺪﻫﺎ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ ﺑﻌﺪ وﺻﻮل دوﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ إﻟﻰ ﺳﺪة اﻟﺮﺋﺎﺳﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة اÇﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ؛ إذ أﺑﺮزت اﻻﺻﻄﻔﺎﻓﺎت اÅ ﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪة ﻣﻴﻠ ﺎ ﻟﺪى ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﺪول اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ إﻟﻰ إﻋﺎدة ﺗﺼﻨﻴﻒ اÇﻋﺪاء واﻟﺤﻠﻔﺎء، وﻇﻬﺮت أﺻﻮات ﻋﺪة ﺗﻨﺎدي ﺑﺘﻄﺒﻴﻊ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎت ﻣﻊ إﺳﺮاﺋﻴﻞ ﺑﻤﺒﺮر اﻟﺘﻼﻗﻲ ﻣﻌﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺪاء إﻳﺮان، أو ﺣﺮﻛﺎت اÅﺳﻼم اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻲ وﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺣﺮﻛﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ اÅﺳﻼﻣﻴﺔ ﺣﻤﺎس. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: اﻟﺮأي اﻟﻌﺎم، اﻟﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ، إﺳﺮاﺋﻴﻞ، ﺣﻤﺎس Tis paper relies on findings from the 2016 Arab Opinion Index to chart Saudi public attitudes towards a number of issues related to the Palestinian Cause, and specifically how Saudis feel about a potential normalization of diplomatic relations between their country and Israel. Tis latter question has added urgency in the present-day climate in the Arab world, with the arrival of Donald Trump to the White House underscoring increasing demands within a number of Arab states for a normalization of ties with Israel, which some see as a natural ally against Iran or political Islamist groups, including the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas).

This study attempts to identify the roles of economic diplomacy actors inside and outside capital cities. By presenting international examples it creates a comparative study to explain the evolution of economic diplomatic action, not only in Morocco – the subject of the study – but also globally. To carry out this analysis the present study argues that there are no longer pure national issues, even those that represent the core of national sovereignty, such as budget, taxes, or development. It suggests that nothing can isolate a country from its surroundings, and that economic diplomacy necessarily involves a country’s essential internal issues. This challenges existing Arabic writings, which put economic diplomacy in the context of traditional diplomacy without differentiating between the various areas of the field.

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.