Latest Articles

This study aims to define the interests and goals of the United States in the Arab region by answering two main questions: how does the Obama administration differ from its predecessors in view of its promises of change, particularly following the tragic transformations raging in the Arab region at present? And to what extent does the strategy of this administration reflect its public diplomacy regarding democracy, freedom, and justice in the region? The study explains how Obama raised the ceiling of expectations when he did not limit his promises to a change in American policy only, but included putting an end to the mentality that had pushed the United States into war. Despite the difference in style and method between the Obama and Bush Junior administrations, the overall goals and the regional strategy can be summarized in terms of three key interests: the priority of ensuring free access to energy supplies in the region; maintaining American supremacy over all other global powers; and the containment of all Arab objections to ensure the dominance of the US strategic agenda in the Arab region, including the guarantee of Israel's security.

Current scholarship on elections in authoritarian regimes has focused on exploring the relationship between elections and democratization, and it has generally used analytical frameworks and methods imported from the study of genuinely democratic elections to do so. These tendencies have kept scholars from asking a wide range of questions about the micro-level dynamics of authoritarian elections and the systematic differences among them. With these issues in mind, this review examines literature that investigates the purpose of elections in dictatorships; the electoral behavior of voters, candidates, and incumbents in these elections; and the link between elections and democratization. The review ends with a call to redirect the study of authoritarian elections toward uncovering and explaining the important differences among them.

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).

This study aims to define the interests and goals of the United States in the Arab region by answering two main questions: how does the Obama administration differ from its predecessors in view of its promises of change, particularly following the tragic transformations raging in the Arab region at present? And to what extent does the strategy of this administration reflect its public diplomacy regarding democracy, freedom, and justice in the region? The study explains how Obama raised the ceiling of expectations when he did not limit his promises to a change in American policy only, but included putting an end to the mentality that had pushed the United States into war. Despite the difference in style and method between the Obama and Bush Junior administrations, the overall goals and the regional strategy can be summarized in terms of three key interests: the priority of ensuring free access to energy supplies in the region; maintaining American supremacy over all other global powers; and the containment of all Arab objections to ensure the dominance of the US strategic agenda in the Arab region, including the guarantee of Israel's security.

The 2011 Arab uprisings sparked hopes for positive change in the regional politics of the Middle East. The uprisings not only challenged the authority of states at the domestic level but seemed poised to disrupt regional geopolitics and alter the position of the Middle East in the international system. With the outbreak of civil wars in Syria, Libya, and Sudan, military interventions in Bahrain and Yemen, and the unprecedented proliferation of armed non- state actors in the region, the uprisings seem to drive important changes in the nature of the state and its regional and international role. Despite its artificial inception and its puzzling survival throughout the 20 th century, the Arab State faces challenges in the post- 2011 era and its vulnerabilities have been exposed. While the uprisings may have weakened Arab states, changes at regional and international levels created permissive conditions to challenge the regional state system. Hamas's 7 October 2023 operation and Israel's ensuing wars in the region have further exacerbated state erosion and reinvigorated post- 2011 regional dynamics. This paper examines how structural international and regional conditions have reshaped statehood and agency in the region post- 2011. It also explores how the responses of Arab states to international conditions and the regional reverberations of the uprisings have further generated disintegrative effects for the Arab state.

​This paper agrues that although the Arab Gulf is strategically located and of economic importance to China, the Gulf states did not fall along the original routes demarcated by the Belt and Road initiative roadmap. Nevertheless, both China and these states have begun to engage with the initiative and its projects by signing strategic partnerships, and to enmesh these projects with perspectives on national development in the Gulf. This has unsettled the United States and its allies, some of whom have begun to view this expansion as a serious challenge. As a result, there has been an attempt to impede the initiative's projects through debt-trap debate, geopolitical alliances, and putting forth alternative economic proposals. This study argues that the Gulf is of great concern to China and the requirements of the Belt and Road initiative, identifying where the Arab Gulf states are located on the initiative map and illustrating the way in which each state has gradually become involved in associated projects. It considers Western mechanisms and alternative projects in response to respond to and impede the initiative and the degree to which these mechanisms may apply to the Gulf states. The paper presents deductive observations as to China's likely approach in the event that the initiative is obstructed and its interests undermined. Will it modify its foreign strategy – and will this impact the Gulf?