Latest Articles

This study attempts to determine the latest changes in the US-Saudi alliance and reflect on its destabilization. Specifically, it aims to determine whether the current crisis in US-Saudi relations might actually lead to a rift. Alternatively, the current events could be nothing but a temporary breakup depending on each country’s vision of its interests, after which relations could resume. The study reached some important results. It concluded, for example, that the speculation of a collapse of the US-Saudi alliance and its replacement with the US-Iranian alliance is farfetched and lacks depth. It is politically impossible and strategically inoperable for the US to side with Iran at the expense of Saudi Arabia amid the current polarization.

In December of 2013, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reshuffled his cabinet, dismissing four ministers linked to a nationwide corruption scandal. Some of the ministers ousted from their positions were involved in the Halkbank scandal, a financial institution involved in the processing of payments for Iranian natural gas supplied to Turkey, and which the US has long accused of violating the terms of international sanctions on Tehran. Erdogan has accused exiled Turkish cleric Fathallah Gulen, a former ally of the AKP leader, of orchestrating these scandals within a wider “international conspiracy” aimed at bringing the AKP government down in retaliation for its regional and international policies. This paper shall examine how the present conflict between Erdogan and his erstwhile ally Gulen will influence Turkish politics, noting that Gulen’s acolytes pose a much greater risk to the AKP than all of the secular Turkish opposition parties combined. ​

​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.

This study evaluates the impact of US aid on Egypt's democratic transition process following the January 2011 revolution. It uses a broader theoretical and analytical framework to explain the role of external forces in the democratic transition in authoritarian countries, specifically looking at US policy towards the spread of democracy in Arab countries and, focusing on Egypt. The study also assesses the scale, objectives and impact of US aid provided to Egypt after the revolution. It is premised on the principle that the quantitative nature of aid may help better understand the priorities of US foreign policy among other factors. The study concludes by recommending the management of the public debate on the role of US aid to spread democracy in Egypt, in light of results revealing the scale, spending avenues and the potential impact of such aid.

​What is the effect of religiosity on public opinion? Islamist religiosity in particular has been linked to a variety of outcomes, including authoritarianism and violence. Nevertheless, many scholars have countered that there is in fact no relationship between religiosity in the Arab world and adverse political outcomes. Thus the debate remains unresolved to some degree. To adjudicate this debate, we use the Arab Opinion Index's 2016 data to examine the effect of individual religiosity on public opinion and political behavior. We find that there is no link between increased religiosity and negative views of democracy; in fact, the opposite is the case. There is also no link between religiosity and political participation. Finally, there is a positive correlation between religiosity and political tolerance.

This paper explores attitudes among Syrian refugees and displaced persons towards the presidential elections held in their country on June 3, 2014. Respondents came from refugee camps located in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan as well as internally displaced persons camps along the Syrian-Turkish frontier. Survey questions also asked respondents about their views of the existing regime and its institutions in addition to their prescriptions for an “ideal solution” to the Syrian crisis. Answers to the latter question came in three distinct categories. A clear majority (64%) which supports a change of regime as the path to an ideal solution to the Syrian conflict, in contrast to a mere 6% who support the total defeat of the opposition by the regime as an ideal end to the crisis. A third group, accounting for 23% of respondents, held that the ideal solution to the Syrian conflict would be peaceful, based on a dialogue which brought together the regime and the opposition.

Book Title: The Concept of the Islamic State: The Crisis of Foundations and the Inevitably of Modernity [Arabic]

This paper elucidates Arab public opinion towards the international aerial campaign against ISIL (the “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant”) in Iraq and Syria, based on the findings of a dedicated opinion survey. The survey included representative, randomized samples in seven countries: Tunisia, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon, in addition to communities of Syrian refugees in three host countries (Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey). Respondents were asked the extent of their support for the aims of the international campaign as well as the conduct of the airstrikes. Survey questions also take in respondents’ views on a number of related issues. The findings show that the vast majority of Arabs are firmly opposed to ISIL, with only 11% of respondents expressing views which are positive, to varying extents, towards the group.