Latest Articles

This book comes to complement the findings of previous research projects in the crises in the Middle East, the American treatment of them, and the impact of the cultural and intellectual composition of the ruling administrations in the US.

This study aims primarily to examine the phenomenon of populism in American politics by focusing on the case of former President Donald Trump's populism (2017 - 2021). It also seeks to trace the historical roots of populism in America. Furthermore, the study aims to identify the key aspects of populism in Trump's rhetoric by researching and analyzing the main factors that contributed to the rise of populism with Trump's presidency in the United States. The study utilizes an analytical approach to observe the aspects of populism in Trump's discourse and analyze the factors that contributed to its rise. Content analysis technique is employed to analyze Trump's political speeches, in addition to using a historical approach to present the historical background of populist movements in the United States. The study concludes that there are several aspects of populism evident in Trump's political discourse. It also finds that there are a variety of factors that contributed to the escalation of populism with Trump's rise to power, including the ramifications of globalization, the impact of certain Republican Party rules, and notably, the Tea Party movement and right-wing populist groups.

In redefining central concepts and causal relations, this paper takes a fresh look at the conflict between armed groups like the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the US-led international alliance. Analysis begins with the hypothesis that “foreign intervention leads to extremism” and goes on to examine its opposite, that “extremism leads to foreign intervention.” In exploring this mutual correlation – regardless of its validity – the paper finds limited analytical space to understand the nature and terms of the current conflict, and thus redefines this relation in a way that puts “foreign intervention” and “extremism” in an alternative conceptual framework. This framework becomes one of “re-regionalization,” and offers new possibilities for understanding the current conflict.

This article discusses the challenges facing the government of Haider al-Abadi in Iraq, and outlines what ought to be expected in the coming stage, particularly after the fall of Mosul to ISIL. The paper reviews the failure of the regime post 2002 to insure equal participation of all segments of Iraq in the institution of power following the sectarian polices adopted by Nouri al-Maliki who exercised control over all the levers of the political regime and the public political institutions, and systematically harassed other politicians and parties – Sunnis in particular. The paper also reviews the American position, the intervention of the international coalition, and the establishment of the national guard. It looks at the other challenges facing the effort to keep Iraq together and help it emerge from its problems, including the threat of ISIL, sectarian division, the security situation, and the economy. The paper also reviews the regional overlap with the Iraqi situation, particularly the Iranian aspect, and what is transpiring as a new regional equation.

​Many analysts and observers believe the opposition media played a critical role in ousting Morsi through their printed and television outlets, which reported against him for a whole year. This paper examines Egyptian media’s policies, starting from Morsi’s becoming president at the end of June 2012 and extending to the stage following his ouster until now. The paper lists the main strategies adopted by the media and lays out models of Egyptian media’s international coverage. It also explores the motives behind the work of some media outlets and their common traits and tries to explain why the media adopted this type of discourse. The paper also highlights the forms of provocation practiced by several Egyptian media outlets against the coup opponents and detects several rumors spread by the media and their source.

​A one-day academic symposium hosted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies will bring together experts from Russia, the Arab world and the region to examine Moscow’s latest military intervention in Syria, on Saturday, October 24, 2015. While Russia’s decision to intervene directly in the conflict in Syria comes as the culmination of more than four years of diplomatic and military support for the Assad regime, the move by the Kremlin to deploy its military forces has come as a surprise to many observers, becoming a turning point not only in the militarized revolution within Syria, but also in the broader Middle East and indeed in a larger global arena. To better study the circumstances which gave rise to the Russian maneuver and the outcomes likely to result from it, the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies will convene “Russian Military Intervention in Syria: Motives, Objectives and Repercussions”. In the highly volatile climate which the Middle East is presently witnessing, selected participants at the meeting will be asked to examine the fallout of Russia’s actions on the future stability of the region.

This report chronicles some of the most significant developments relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict during 28/2/2015-30/4/2016.

This study examines the shifts in the US decision-making process with regard to Jerusalem, spotlighting those taking place over the last decade and the structure and tendencies of Israeli lobby groups in the United States. The paper is divided into three sections: a theoretical approach to understanding US policy on Jerusalem; an outline of the history of Jerusalem in US foreign policy and Congress; and finally, Jerusalem, Israel and American policymakers, investigating the role of evangelicals, American Jews, Democratic and Republican party policy and the Israeli lobby in US decision-making on Jerusalem.

Examining the Egypt's military coup against an elected president on July 3 2013, this paper compares these summer events with similar experiences of countries that were also in the early stages of democratic development, including Venezuela in 2002 and Algeria in 1992. It looks in particular at the relationships between the "deep state," the "street," and the media in shaping the course of a coup's aftermath. In Egypt, the paper shows, it was the alliance liberal and secular forces with private media companies as well as military institution's reliance on its "deep state" network, which played a central role in mobilizing the street against the elected president Mohamed Morsi. This led to a counterrevolution that brought the tyrannical state and its figures back to power. Reading into the post-coup models Egypt's internal circumstances, regional situation, and the nature of the organization itself (different in many respects from the nature of the Islamist political movement that went through the same experience in Algeria), the paper draws out possible scenarios for the future of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Current Russian policy is based on a nationalism that rests on state capitalism, and that speaks to nationalist sentiment built on the rejection of Western exploitation. This patriotic nationalist position becomes evident through the lack of any ideologically derived principles driving Russia’s position: state interests including national security are what drive current policy. The drivers for this new Russian policy mean that Russia can simultaneously suppress a separatist movement by armed force in one region and champion another separatist movement with armed force in another. In this sense, the Russian Federation has no fixed positions but only fixed interests, and even its interests can change. In Syria, critics suggest that the proximate aim of Russia’s policy is to defend the Assad regime, Moscow’s ally, from collapse. Saving the regime is not, however, an end in itself. Rather, it is a means of self-assertion and another step toward the goal of becoming a global superpower, this time in the Middle East. If the Syrian regime believes its rescue is the exclusive objective of Russia’s intervention, it is wrong. The exertion of Russian influence will at most provide a temporary respite. The mere fact of Russia’s military presence in Syria means that the regime is no longer master of its own destiny and no longer even a player on the international stage, since Russia is now its proxy at any international negotiations.