Latest Articles

The shared nature of transboundary water resources often raises tensions regarding their allocation and use, potentially leading to strained relations and cooperation among nations. With 153 countries involved in these cross-border resources, the sustainable and collaborative management of rivers, lakes, and groundwater layers becomes critically important. This necessitates a coordinated water diplomacy approach to avoid the escalation of conflicts. While interpretations of water diplomacy may vary, it is crucial to emphasize its significance in achieving broader goals beyond water management.

Globalization and extremism or radicalism are two important phenomena attracting unprecedented attention. They conquer an ever expanding space in traditional and modern media outlets today. Moreover, they have become major topics of research, academic studies, scholarly conferences and seminars, and specialized reports in think tank and policy-making circles. This fact raises important questions. Is there any relationship between globalization and radicalism in the world today? And if so, as this paper contends; what is its nature? What are the mechanisms behind it? And how does it manifest itself? These are major questions the paper attempts to answer. But before engaging in that, we need to consider the concepts themselves. What is Globalization and how it has come to be? What is Extremism, and what are its sources and consequences? What is radicalism, and how it relates to extremism? In what fields these two phenomena can be best observed.

This study examines the impact of post-truth discourse during the 2019 Sudanese Revolution and the subsequent transitional period, as well as the role played by social media platforms in promoting this discourse and mobilizing broad segments of the population behind it. The study also explores the susceptibility of social media users to follow false news in contrast to their engagement with factual reporting. It argues that the Sudanese Revolution and the transitional phase (2019 – 2023) coincided with the emergence of a new media landscape rooted in a politically and socially divided environment, characterized by diverse perspectives and the growing influence of social media. These platforms played positive roles in the dynamics of the revolution, significantly contributing to the mobilization of large popular groups to participate in demonstrations and sit-ins that ultimately led to the regime's overthrow. However, they also generated confusion and uncertainty among these groups due to the rise of post-truth discourse fueled by fake news, which in turn intensified polarization among revolutionary youth and activists.

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.

The study concerns the armed Shiism in Iraq and its most prominent embodiment, the Mahdi Army (MA). It deals with the relationship between the MA and the Sadrist movement, as a case og the relationship between political organizations and their armed wings. It explores the specificity of this relationship, whereby the MA arose within the Najaf Shiite's Hawza . Hence, the MA was not a typical armed wing, but was more like a general beacon of mobilization for the Shiite community in Iraq. MA was the first organizational step for the movement as much as its presence as the armed wing remained an essential pillar, controlling and determining the development of the movement. The study argues that the debate over the extent of armed action led to a struggle over the identity of the movement, between two wings: remaining an armed organization, or turning to political action. Therefore, the leadership's efforts to control MA were intersects with the political struggle between its wings.

This study distinguishes between three Interrelated theoretical approaches prevalent in writings of researchers seeking to understand the emergence of the Islamic Resistance Movement, "Hamas". The first of these approaches examines the movement from the portal of ideology, stressing the importance of international and regional dimensions and the rise of political Islam after the "setback" (Naksa) of the 1967 Six Day War. The second approaches Hamas as representing a social movement seeking to revisit the historical narrative of Palestinian society. The third considers it to be the heir of the Palestinian national liberation movement, attributing its rise to transformations witnessed in Palestinian identity and the Palestinian community's definition of itself. Although the three readings do not contradict each other, a focus on one of them can lead to oversimplification or exaggeration: emphasis on the first approach is at risk of overlooking transformations in the movement in its later stages and a marginalization at the micro level of local dimensions; emphasis on the second approach can result in the overestimation of the effectiveness of collective action; exaggerated emphasis on the third approach deprives social actors of their effectiveness. Hence this study proposes situating Hamas in the intersection of these three approaches.

This testimony provides a qualitative understanding of the diversity of Kurdish positions on the Syrian revolution, and the evolution of Kurdish attitudes over the course of the revolution. The position of the Kurds, like all Syrians, was never homogenous. Within this context, the writer distinguishes three declared positions (pro-revolution, pro-regime, and observer), as well as another, hesitant position that interacts with the situation and waits. The writer concludes that Syrian Kurdish communities are now witnessing a clear distinction between two main political positions. The first is represented by the Kurdish National Council, which works within the Syrian opposition institutions. The second position is represented by the Democratic Union Party, and the parties in its orbit. This trend is a regional project that does not intersect with the Syrian national project.

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.

​This study explores the concept of a traditional balance of power based on realism, which, for several reasons, is unsuitable to explain the relations between the US and the Gulf States. First, competition between the main regional powers, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran, is not characterized of direct confrontation, but rather manifests through proxy interference in civil war-torn countries (Syria, Yemen, and Iraq). Second, since the greatest threat to the region that has resulted from this competition is an unintended escalation, the final endgame must be collective security and stability, not a balance of power. Third, balance of power in the conventional sense is unrealistic given the actual quantitative and qualitative conventional military superiority of the GCC countries compared to Iran's military capacity.

Has the 2011 Constitution Stalled the Democratic Transition of Morocco?