Latest Articles

​This paper addresses a theoretical model for the concept of "consociational democracy", beginning with the concept's roots in the Austrian Marxist tradition before describing its elaboration in 1969 by the Dutch-American political scientist Arend Lijphart. Lijphart's work was part of his wider critique of Gabriel Almond's categorization of Western political systems. This study presents a structural criticism of the term "consociational democracy" and its usage, arguing that the practice of "consociational democracy" was born of pragmatic policies before maturing into a theoretical model. It argues that the subsequent contributions of Lijphart were merely an extrapolation from a set of examples without "theory" to underpin it and that "power sharing" does not necessarily lead to democratization. The study thus draws up several theoretical observations that help distinguish "consociationalism" from "consociational democracy". Finally, the paper contrasts the suitability of this theoretical model for both Northern Ireland and Lebanon.

This paper addresses problematic aspects of the concept of "terrorism" from within its present-day setting, exploring the futile conflict between "terrorism" and "counter-terrorism" which has been utilized to marginalize the discourse on democracy, justice and national liberation. The paper argues that the categorization of an event as a terrorist act based on the identity of the perpetrator, and regardless of the victims, leads to a logical fallacy. One consequence of categorizing all armed acts by non-state actors as "terrorist" is the erosion of distinctions between terrorist acts and acts of national liberation, resistance to foreign occupation and armed opposition to state violence against civilians. One conclusion of the paper is that blurring the distinctions between terrorist and legitimate acts is counterproductive to the war on terror.

ﺗﺴﻠﻂ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺮاﻛﺰ اﻟﺒﺤﻮث واﻟﻤﻨﺎﺑﺮ اﻋﻼﻣﻴﺔ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﺘﺠﺔ ﻟ{ﻓﻜﺎر واﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻼت اﻟﺘﻲ ﻛﺎن ﻟﻬﺎ دور ﺣﺎﺳﻢ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻨﻊ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻴﺔ، واﻟﻤﻨﺎخ اﻟﺬي أﺷﺎﻋﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ "ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ". وﺗﺒﻴﻦ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ اﻟﺴﻤﺎت ا ﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺬه اﻟﻜﺘﺎﺑﺎت ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﺎل اﻟﺘﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻓﻲ ﺻﻨﻊ اﻟﻘﺮار اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﻲ اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻲ، ﻛﻤﺎ ﺗﺘﻨﺎول اﻟﻌﻨﺎﺻﺮ اﻟﻔﻜﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺑﺎﺗﺖ ادارة اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺗﺴﺘﻠﻬﻢ ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻌﻀ ﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻠﻘﺎﺗﻬﺎ اﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ إزاء اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﻗﻄﺮ، ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﺟﺮى اﻟﺘﺮﻛﻴﺰ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻪ ﻣﺎ داﻣﺖ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﻓﻲ دورﻫﺎ ﻣﺼﺪرًا ﻟﺘﻤﻮﻳﻞ اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﺎت ارﻫﺎﺑﻴﺔ واﻟﻤﺘﻄﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺸﺮق اوﺳﻂ، وﺗﺠﻴّﺮ ﻗﻮﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﻨﺎﻋﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﺼﻠﺤﺔ اﺳﻼم اﻟﺮادﻳﻜﺎﻟﻲ، ﻓﻤﻦ اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮل ﻃﺮح اﻟﺴﺆال إن ﻛﺎن ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻴًﺎ اﺳﺘﻤﺮار إدارة دوﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺗﺮاﻣﺐ ﻓﻲ "اﺳﺘﺌﺠﺎر أﺻﻮل" ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﺗﺆﻳﺪ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻫﺬه اﻟﻄﺒﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ اﺳﻼم. واﻟﻬﺪف، ﺑﺤﺴﺐ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺤﺎﺟﺞ اﻟﻮرﻗﺔ، ﻫﻮ أن ﺗﺒﻘﻰ ﻗﻄﺮ ﺗﺤﺖ اﻟﻤﺠﻬﺮ، ﻣﻜﺒّﻠﺔ اﻟﻴﺪﻳﻦ ﻋﻦ اﻟﺘﺤﺮك وﻓﺎﻗﺪة اﻟﻤﺒﺎدرة، وﻓﻲ اﻧﺘﻈﺎر ﺳﺎﻛﻦ ﺧﺎرج ﺣﻠﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﺴﺮح اﻗﻠﻴﻤﻲ. ﻛﻠﻤﺎت ﻣﻔﺘﺎﺣﻴﺔ: ﻗﻄﺮ، ﻣﺮاﻛﺰ اﻟﺒﺤﻮث اﻣﻴﺮﻛﻴﺔ، ازﻣﺔ اﻟﺨﻠﻴﺠﻴﺔ. This paper highlights US research centers and platforms producing ideas and literatures that have played a crucial role in shaping US foreign policy and the climate that has shaped it in the formation of the "Trump's World", and outlines the main features of these writings in influencing US foreign policy-making. Furthermore, the paper discusses the intellectual elements that the current US administration is drawing form some of its basic premises on the attitude towards Qatar. These writings emphasizes that as long as Qatar continues to play its role as a source of funding for terrorist and extremist groups in the Middle East, the question raises weather Tramp administration would continue to "lease assets" from a country that supported such a version of Islam, but the goal is to keep Qatar inactive and waiting outside the regional theater.

The June, 1967 War was a turning point in the modern history not only of Palestine and the Zionist state but also the wider region. The defeat of the Arab armies was a pivotal moment for the modern and contemporary histories of the Arab world, and has consequences which continue to reverberate today. That fact remains unchanged despite attempts by Arab governments to gloss over the severity of what happened during the war, first by employing the euphemism of Naksa (or "setback") to describe what happened and later to celebrate the fact that "progressive" Arab regimes were not toppled by the Israeli army. Despite the significance of these events, the Arabic academic literature continues to lack a serious analysis of the events of June, 1967, in stark contrast to the hundreds of academic works published by Israeli and western authors. This reality necessitates a rereading of the war, and the formulation of a new Arab narrative about it, which the author attempts in this paper.

This paper argues that hybrid regimes help to create an environment that encourages the transformation of political disputes into identity conflicts. In such regimes, there is no resolution to the advantage of a particular party, since there is neither full authoritarianism that prevents the existence of any form of competition, rivalry, or conflict, or full democracy that permits the existence of democratic competition according to principles of pluralism, the peaceful transfer of power, and legal guarantees. In the environment of these hybrid regimes there are some features of democracy and many features of authoritarianism, and so political competition usually begins as a dispute over points of view and intellectual assumptions and ends up as an identity conflict leading to the dissociation of society.

Book Title: Who Rules the World? [English] Author: Noam Chomsky Edition: 1st Year of publication: 2016 Publisher: Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt & Co, NYC Pages: 309

China's economic growth led to a concomitant expansion of its interests across the globe, and the Middle East and North Africa s today vital to the sustainability of that growth.

This study reviews the various Syrian military groups currently active against the Syrian regime, and discusses the circumstances that led to their formation as well as their intellectual and political orientations, links, and funders. The study sees that in general these groups can be divided into two main currents: one with a secular orientation and one with an Islamist orientation. It argues that these military groups were formed spontaneously, in response to the violence of the regime, rather than as an intentional political act. In addition, uneducated sectors were confronted with the task of forming most of the leaderships of these military groups and actually leading them, which helped make their visions lack clarity. This study is a contribution toward filling the gap in Arab academic research on armed Syrian opposition forces.

​This study examines the foundations and development of teaching political science in Sudanese universities. It begins with the establishment of Gordon Memorial College in 1902 which became later the University of Khartoum. This is because it is the oldest Sudanese university, and the first to teach political science. Influenced by the objectives of the Gordon Memorial College formation, the attachment with the University of London before independence, and the early lecturers who taught there, the department of political science in the university adopted curricula pursued in British universities. In addition, the study discusses the expansion of political science to include Umdurman Islamic University and other universities. Moreover, it analyzes the intellectual perspectives that influenced the development of teaching political science in Sudanese universities, curricula development, means of training, and the impact of politics and policies on political science teaching.

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.