Latest Articles

Given the unrest boiling in the region, this paper considers the possibility of partitioning the countries of the Levant. Given the state of affairs and current political indicators in Syria and Iraq, which suggest the Kurds have started to regain their national unity and awareness, the group is now the only faction in the Levant fighting on nationalist or ethnic bases. What makes it easier for them to establish a viable Kurdish entity, at the local level, is the fact that they have huge economic, political, human, and military potential. This paper examines local and international contexts and obstacles to the establishment of a Kurdish state. It also argues that it will be unlikely, meanwhile, that sectarian entities could be created in Syria and Iraq given current local and international circumstances. Indeed, sectarian tension is nothing more than social tension that is the result of imbalance in the distribution of wealth and power, and the result of political authoritarianism. Therefore, the warring groups are not part of the framework of separatist tendencies; though they are liable to turn into sectarian nationalisms due to foreign intervention and agendas.

A convergence of interests between the Houthi militia and former Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh have served to undermine the National Dialogue for the country, which had earlier formed an implementation mechanism for the GCC Initiative. Previously, the aims of that Dialogue were intended to further the cause of a federalist, democratic state which decentralized power. This would have changed the status quo, in which power was concentrated in what Yemenis call the “Holy Center”, a tribalist-sectarian concentration of political and financial power which been in place for a millennium and which survived into the reborn, unified and modern-day Yemen of 1994.

The rise of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and its capture of vast territories in the Fertile Crescent, has confounded the political calculations of a number of all major political players invested in the Arab region, including regional and global powers. With the failure of regional actors to contain the group, the United States was forced to backtrack on its military withdrawal from the region—when it pulled its troops out of Iraq—and become involved, anew, in the Middle East.

External influence has played a central role in the Yemeni conflict. Powers seeking to extend power and establish dominance have manipulated Yemen’s diversity as a way to gain influence. Other powers seem to be using Yemen as a way to step into regional power vacuums. At the same time, diplomatic activity has been used as a way to maintain interests and sustain polar uniqueness. Each of these areas of influence are key to understanding the current conflict and for determining a path ahead. This paper examines these avenues and specifically looks at key developments leading up to the current conflict. These include the six wars waged by Ali Abdullah Saleh against the Houthis, the political game shifts in Yemen, the weakening of the state and other factors that led to the take-over Yemen’s capital city of Sanaa.

Book Title: Military Intelligence Comes to Light [Hebrew]

This study tries to demonstrate that the removal of the Gadhafi regime created new symbolic and political boundaries in Libya that go beyond the simplistic divide between those for the revolution and those against. These boundaries took on the guise of purity and impurity, honor and dishonor. They were also skillfully employed in the complex conflict for power that developed on the heels of the transition to the post-Gadhafi state. The author argues that the Gadhafi regime was highly personality based, and therefore the state also collapsed when the center collapsed. This fact left a set of local powerbrokers in its wake – from militias and revolutionary brigades to local councils, tribes, and local leaders, among them people with Islamist leanings, all of whom are competing for power and influence. The creation of these symbolic boundaries and their objective embodiment in the real world is likely to hinder the efforts of Libya to transform itself into a functioning and viable state.

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 paper seeks to investigate the reasons behind the latest Palestinian national reconciliation, signed on April 23, 2014, and the circumstances in which it took place, and which prompted Fatah and Hamas to set aside their long-standing divisions which had pitted the West Bank against the Gaza Strip. The paper attempts to determine if this latest reconciliation between the two largest Palestinian political factions will be any more successful than previous attempts to end Palestinian in-fighting. It also seeks to understand what drove the present (Fatah-led) Palestinian National Authority based in Ramallah to defy both the White House and the Israeli government in seeking to turn a page with Hamas. Where do the prospects for the success of this latest reconciliation stand?

The election of a president in Lebanon is an important event not because of the person or their powers—since indeed the role lost its power after the Taif Agreement—

This report chronicles some of the most significant developments relating to the