Latest Articles

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 investigates the role of the police apparatus in Egypt during the 2011 revolution and the subsequent counter-revolution following the 2013 coup. It begins by examining the relationships between the Military Council, President Mohamed Morsi, and the police apparatus. The study then explores how the Ministry of Interior and its security agencies reverted to their previous repressive practices, including extrajudicial killings and torture. The research highlights that the security apparatus remained fragmented, marked by overlapping authorities and a focus on resource competition rather than coordination. However, the existential threat posed by the 2011 revolution compelled the apparatus to unify against the tangible threat of popular unrest. Following 2013 , the military, security and intelligence agencies furthered the suppression of opposition in various forms, largely evading accountability.

This study explores the challenges facing Indian foreign policy in West Asia, especially the attempt to balance the forces in the Arab Region in light of competition between West Asian states to spread their influence. It argues that Arab countries have demonstrated a willingness to see India undertake a greater role in maintaining peace and stability in the region. But Indian strategies seem limited, not only requiring bilateral collaboration, but also to rationalize their competitive relations at the regional and global levels. The study argues that India must redraw its strategic vision of the region, as well as its regional and global partnerships with China, Pakistan, Russia and the United States, a process that will undoubtedly have repercussions for India's traditional reluctant West Asia policy.

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.

This paper highlights the role of the armed forces and their impact on the process of political transition, and discusses civil-military relations in their various aspects: the state, society and the armed forces per se, in order to reveal the main pillars that constitute a balance between the power of political institutions (legislative and executive) and the military power of the army. Such a balance would lead to the subduing of the army to the civil authority, and confine military activities to security and defense. The paper focuses on the common characteristics shared by states that have succeeded in building democratic armies. To conclude, the author presents a set of recommendations addressed to activists and democrats, on what ought to be done and what should be avoided in the security-defense field during the process of democratic army building.

This paper offers insights into the Crisis of Liberal International Order by combining Ibn Khaldun's theory of change with scholarship on liberalism and race. We argue that the crisis emerges from the incongruence of two features of liberal order: a binding feature (or 'assabiyya) of white supremacy and liberalism's principles of equality. The crisis is an outcome of a normative political order that can no longer balance a material and discursive reality of racialised hierarchy with ideals of equality. The crisis cannot be reduced to bad leadership or a technical failure to enact liberal values. Instead, attempts to think beyond the crisis must acknowledge the incongruence between white supremacy and liberal equality. Through this diagnosis, we gesture towards the constructive use of "non-Western" theory in the discipline of International Relations.

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.

In 2015, Lebanon witnessed the emergence of a massive contentious movement, known as "You Stink", in response to the unfolding of the waste crisis when the main landfill known as "Naameh" was closed. Though other opposition movements preceded it in the post-war period, "You Stink" succeeded in positioning itself as a threat to the continuity in power of the informal pillars of political power- the "politically relevant elites". Accordingly, the aim of the paper is to identify first those who are influential in framing national political agendas, hence targeted by the movement itself. Second, based on semi-structured interviews conducted with key activists within "You Stink", the paper provides an exploratory analysis of the zu'ama's receptivity to it, unpacking the strategies employed to neutralize the movement. It concludes that in addition to obstructive strategies put into play by the zu'ama, certain operative caveats within the movement itself, acted as "political opportunities" to the former's capacity to neutralize and weaken the movement.