Latest Articles

This study argues that relying on the United States for of security and defense has led to the neglect of the Arab Gulf states to varying degrees. These countries failed to build an independent regional security capacity or develop broad security relations with third parties besides the United States. Since President Barack Obama took office in 2009-2016, before Donald Trump replaced him, questioning the regional balance of power, this reliance has destabilized the most stable part of the Arab world. This study examines the implications of the unprecedented regional reality regarding the strategic and security relations between the United States and the Gulf in the context of the divergent views of Washington and its local partners on regional security management methods, in particular the role of the GCC in managing peace and security.

​Qatari foreign policy presents a challenge for students of international relations. Whereas major theories within the field tend to privilege structural factors in explaining the action of states, and particularly small states, in the case of Qatar, the quality of leadership and the strategies that leadership employs to navigate through the structural constraints—primarily geography—are equally important. One of the main findings of this paper is that the strategies adopted by the Qatari elite since 1995 did alleviate many of the structural constraints which the country would otherwise have faced. Moreover, during the short-lived Arab Spring of 2011-2013, Qatar tried to reshape the political landscape in the Middle East to its favor, challenging the two regional hegemons Saudi Arabia and Iran, in Egypt and Syria respectively. Yet, the paper concludes, geopolitical factors and the relative capabilities of states remain instrumental in assuring a state’s sustained capacity to continue playing a key role. This is particularly true in a region where elite thinking continues to be defined by realpolitik.

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).

US and Gulf relations are based on more than self-interest, but common selfinterest is always a key (or the key) factor in shaping an alliance and strategic relationship. The key common self-interests that drives US and Arab Gulf relations are security – the need to deal with Iran, fighting extremism, and securing the flow of petroleum exports out of the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula to meet the needs of the global economy, and to provide the key source of income for the Gulf states. This study explains why the United States maintains close ties with its Arab strategic partners in the Gulf. The study finds out that the US and its Gulf strategic partners face serious challenges, including domestic political change in the US, divisions between Arab states, the impact of regional conflicts and instability, and the growing role of non-Western powers.

Today, India is actively engaged in projecting its influence beyond its geographic proximity. It has a proactive policy based on national interests and driven by its growing needs, particularly for energy imports, and an ambition to achieve a position of global prominence. The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is of great geopolitical importance to India's strategy because of its geographic proximity, the abundance of energy resources, the great financial assets, and as the place with the largest Indian immigrant community. Nevertheless, many regional contenders may challenge India's interests in the region. This article discusses the geopolitical and economic importance of the GCC states and their current position in India's strategy. It explores the driving forces behind novel strategic partnerships between them. It also analyses how third-party relations with the GCC states or India may affect their relationships, such as China, Pakistan, and Iran. It also focuses on the new containment policy of India and China and their geopolitical contest over the Gulf and the GCC's hydrocarbon and financial assets.

This study discusses Saudi-Iranian rivalry in the Persian Gulf, focusing on political, economic, strategic, historical, and religious dimensions. It details the escalation of tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran since 1979 up until 2019, before delving into the agreement to restore diplomatic relations between the two countries in March 2023. The study concludes that countries in the international system tend to maximize their capabilities and enhance their power; which sometimes leads to escalation in hostilities and the pursuit of an arms race. Iran's security strategy also includes enhancing its power and capabilities in pursuit of regional hegemony. Saudi Arabia sees Iran as its greatest security threat, whereby Iran poses multiple air, sea, and cyber security challenges to the Kingdom.​

ﺗﺸﻬﺪ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ ﻣﻨﺬ أواﺧﺮ أﻳﺎر/ ﻣﺎﻳﻮ 2017 أزﻣﺔ دﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻋﺪد ﻣﻦ دول ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻲ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ، ﻫﻲ ا ﻛﺜﺮ ﺣﺪةً ﻣﻨﺬ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ﻋﺎم 1981. ﺑﺪأت ا زﻣﺔ ﺑﺤﻤﻠﺔ إﻋﻼﻣﻴّﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ دوﻟﺔ ﻗﻄﺮ، ﻗﺎدﺗﻬﺎ وﺳﺎﺋﻞ إﻋﻼم ﺳﻌﻮدﻳﺔ وإﻣﺎراﺗﻴﺔ. وﺑﺨﻼف أزﻣﺔ ﺳﺤﺐ اﻟﺴﻔﺮاء ﻋﺎم 2014، أﻗﺪﻣﺖ ﺛﻼث دول ﺧﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ ﻫﻲ اﻟﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ، واﻟﺒﺤﺮﻳﻦ، واﻣﺎرات ﻣﻊ ﻣﺼﺮ، ﻓﻲ اﻟﺨﺎﻣﺲ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺰﻳﺮان/ ﻳﻮﻧﻴﻮ 2017، ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻄﻊ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎت اﻟﺪﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻴﺔ وﻓﺮض ﺣﺼﺎر ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺛﻢ ﺳﻠ ﻤﺘﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ، وأﻣﻬﻠﺘﻬﺎ ﻋﺸﺮة أﻳﺎم ﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺬﻫﺎ أو ﻣﻮاﺟﻬﺔ ﺳﻴﻨﺎرﻳﻮﻫﺎت ﺗﺼﻌﻴﺪﻳﺔ. وﻓﻲ اﻃﺎر ﻧﻔﺴﻪ، ﺗﺴﻌﻰ ﻫﺬه اﻟﺪول إﻟﻰ ﻋﺰل ﻗﻄﺮ دﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻴًﺎ وﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺟﺒﺎرﻫﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺨﻀﻮع، ﻏﻴﺮ أنّ اﻟﻘﻮى اﻟﻜﺒﺮى ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻠﺖ ﺑﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ أﻛﺒﺮ ﺗﺠﺎه ازﻣﺔ، وﺑﺪأت ﺗﻘﻮم ﺑﺪور اﻟﻮﺳﻴﻂ ﻟﺘﺴﻮﻳﺘﻬﺎ. ﺗﺴﻠﻂ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﺬور ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ وﻣﺴﺎراﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﻤﺘﻌﺮﺟﺔ ﺑﺤﻜﻢ ﺗﺪاﺧﻞ أدوار ﻋﺪد ﻣﻦ اﻟﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴﻦ اﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﻦ واﻟﺪوﻟﻴﻴﻦ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ، ﺣﺼﺎر ﻗﻄﺮ، ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻲ. Since late May 2017, the Gulf region has been witness to the most intense diplomatic crisis since the formation of the Gulf Cooperation Council in 1981. Tis paper attempts to highlight the roots of the present-day Gulf crisis and explore the potential, complicated outcomes, taking in the roles of various regional and global players. Te crisis begun with a vicious smear campaign against Qatar and led by Saudi- and Emirati-state owned media. In contrast to the 2014 diplomatic rif in which the Ambassadors of the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain were withdrawn from Doha, this latest crisis also included a complete severing of diplomatic ties on the part of the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in addition to Egypt.To this was later added a complete blockade of Qatar by air, sea and land. Te countries leading the siege on Doha later presented a ten-point ultimatum to Qatar to fulfill within 10 days. A further attempt by the countries leading the blockade to isolate Qatar on the world stage failed, however, as leading world powers opted to play a more constructive role and mediate an end to the crisis.

India adopts a cautious policy towards the GCC states during the emergence of differences between them, such as the Gulf crisis of 2017 - 2021. This stems from many considerations: First, the principle of non-alignment. Despite Narendra Modi's government focus on proactive diplomacy and engagement abroad, it has reverted to the principle of non-alignment and neutrality in dealing with the crisis. Second, the special relationship with the GCC states. Given the depth of historical interdependence, geographic proximity and intertwining of economic interests, these states are India's most important trading partner and are home to the largest overseas Indian community. Third, the roles of other countries. Because the competing countries such as China and Pakistan have remained neutral, this has encouraged India not to take an active role in solving the conflict. United States' key role in mediation encouraged New Delhi to remain neutral, taking advantage of Washington's efforts and its influence in securing energy routes. Nevertheless, India has taken an active role in providing Qatar with essential needs and food products during the crisis.

ﺗﺴﻠﻂ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺤﺪدات اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻒ اﻳﺮاﻧﻲ ﻣﻦ ا زﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ اﻟﺮاﻣﻲ إﻟﻰ ﻣﻨﻊ أيّ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺠﻐﺮاﻓﻴﺎ اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ، ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﻘﻒ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﺳﺐ ﻃﻬﺮان ﻣﻦ اﺳﺘﻤﺮار ا زﻣﺔ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺧﺴﺎرة اﻟﺮﻳﺎض ﺑﻌﺾ ﺣﻠﻔﺎﺋﻬﺎ اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﻴﻦ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺞ وﺧﺎرﺟﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ، وﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺴﺎﺋﺮﻫﺎ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻌﺔ أﻳﻀ - ﺎ ﻟﻮ ﻃﺎل أﻣﺪ ازﻣﺔ أو اﺗﺠﻬﺖ اﻟﻘﻮى اﻟﻤﺆﺛﺮة ﻓﻴﻬﺎ إﻟﻰ ﺳﻴﻨﺎرﻳﻮﻫﺎت ﺗﺼﻌﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺄﻧﻬﺎ زﻳﺎدة اﻟﺘﺪﺧﻞ ا ﻣﻴﺮﻛﻲ - ﻣﻦ ﺟﻬﺔ أﺧﺮى. وﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺧﺼﻮﻣﺘﻬﺎ اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ، ﺗﻤﻴﻞ دواﺋﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻋﺪة ﻓﻲ ﻃﻬﺮان إﻟﻰ اﺗﺨﺎذ ﻣﻮﻗﻒ ﺣﺬر ﻣﻦ ازﻣﺔ، ﺧﺸﻴﺔ ﺗﺒﻌﺎت دوﻟﻴﺔ وإﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺬا اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻒ؛ إذ ﻻ ﺗﺒﺪو إﻳﺮان اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ وﺿﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻲ ﺟﻴﺪ، ﻓﻬﻲ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺠﻦ ﻣﻜﺎﺳﺐ ﺗﺬﻛﺮ ﻣﻦ اﻻﺗﻔﺎق اﻟﻨﻮوي ﻛﻤﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻤﻨ ﻲ ﻧﻔﺴﻬﺎ. ﻟﺬﻟﻚ، رﺑﻤﺎ ﻻ ﺗﺮﻏﺐ ﻓﻲ اﻻﻧﺨﺮاط ﻓﻲ أزﻣﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة، ﻓﻲ ﻇﻞ وﺟﻮد إدارة أﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ ﺗﻨﺎﺻﺒﻬﺎ اﻟﻌﺪاء وﺗﻔﺮض ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ اﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻌﻘﻮﺑﺎت. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ، إﻳﺮان، ﻗﻄﺮ، اﻟﺴﻌﻮدﻳﺔ، ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ. This paper explores the determinants of Iran's stance towards the 2017 intra-GCC Crisis, in which the country opposes alterations to the political geography of the Gulf. The author demonstrates how Tehran simultaneously benefits from the loss of Saudi Arabia of some of its allies and stands to lose from increased American involvement in the event that the conflict is prolonged. Despite its long-standing rivalry with Saudi Arabia, many Iranian decision-makers are cautious with regards to the intra-GCC crisis, fearing the possible regional or global fallout of a more involved role. Lacking tangible benefits from the nuclear deal with the P51+ group of countries, official Iran seems reluctant to involve itself in a crisis which could complicate both its domestic political situation and its foreign relations, especially in light of a hostile US Administration.

This article sheds light on the reasons behind the lag of Arab public administration scholarship behind the needs of coping with the questions of political and administrative reform and situating public administration within the context of political governance. This article draws insights from the development of the field in the US experience, its fuzzy boundaries, and value conflicts. This was characterized by overlap and the value struggle caused by the three tributaries that established the knowledge and research architecture of the field, namely law, business administration, and political science. The study concludes with a discussion of how different origins and political context detached public administration research in the Arab world from the ontological and methodological diversity that contribute to the richness of the field in the US experience.