Latest Articles

​This paper discusses international competition in Latin America between the United States, Russia, and China. Whilst the United States aims to maintain its traditional influence in the region based on the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which made Latin America a zone of exclusive influence for the US due to its geographic and economic significance. Russia and China instead seek to challenge this influence, on the one hand in the face of American expansionism in their respective vicinities, and on the other to bring about a multipolar global order. Moreover, the region is of economic importance to those states. The study arrives at the basic conclusion that the US still has the greatest military and economic presence in Latin America, but Russia and China have managed to penetrate the region by establishing military relations with anti-US regimes, most prominently Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua. Moreover, China has become an important trade partner to countries such as Brazil and Argentina, surpassed the US in trade volume with these states.

​The study addresses the issue of armament and the security dilemma in the Maghreb region, focusing on the rivalry between Algeria and Morocco. It argues that the armament level of the two countries has risen significantly in recent years, in the context of structural rivalry, making the Maghreb region one of the most heavily armed regions in the world, despite the absence of existential inter-Maghreb threats. The study attempts to examine the armament issue in the Maghreb and to understand its determinants and developments, focusing on the factors that influence it and on its likely consequences. Adopting the realist approach as a theoretical framework, it analyses SIRPI's data to demonstrate the high volume of Maghreb military expenditure and its evolution, and examines the Maghreb armament and its determinants and military risks. The study concludes that: the armament of the two countries reflects their competition over leadership and their threat perceptions; the armament dynamic is independent from the inter-Maghreb political tensions; the existence of a potential military confrontation between the two regional powers due to the interaction between emerging factors and structural ones.

The struggle for political legitimacy has been central to political polarization in Egypt since the 2013 coup. Given the regime's pronounced authoritarian features, the traditional form of legal electoral legitimacy proved insufficient and ineffective. As a result, the regime adopted alternative strategies to reinforce its political legitimacy. Drawing on theories of political legitimacy and literature on citizenship in authoritarian regimes, this study explores the measures and practices implemented by the July 2013 regime to achieve legitimacy across its three dimensions: the system's effectiveness and competence, citizens' beliefs in its legitimacy, and their behaviours that signal recognition.

What motivates an authoritarian system, or more precisely, its leadership, which tailors legislation to its needs, violates it at will, usurps powers and combines them as it wishes, to support the existence of a seemingly "formal" independent judiciary? Moreover, how does it allow this judiciary to challenge it by limiting its authorities and narrowing its interests? The study revisits this perennial yet contemporary question, employing the Palestinian experience as a case study. It adopts a comprehensive analytical approach, examining the orientations of the Palestinian Constitutional Judiciary (PCJ), represented by the Supreme Constitutional Court and its predecessor, the Supreme Court as a temporary constitutional court, over two decades (2002 - 2022). The study originated from the assumption that the PCJ undertakes a "dual function" akin to experiences observed in authoritarian regimes, where there is a propensity for the existence of a judiciary that allows the sacrifice of some of its non-essential interests. This sacrifice is made in exchange for its utilization in legitimizing the regime and/or reassuring investors and/or controlling the administrative apparatus. However, the study concluded that the sole central and substantive interest is the support of the alleged legitimacy of the regime, and there is no corresponding sacrifice of non- essential interests. Instead, there is an abandonment of human rights.

This special issue focuses on academic discussions in the field of water cooperation and diplomacy, which have garnered increased attention in recent decades due to growing threats to the use of shared water resources. The contributions in this special issue aim to understand the challenges of transboundary water cooperation and its prospects in the Arab region. The materials illustrate how water cooperation in the Arab region is essential, necessitating more engaged strategies in water diplomacy and regional collaboration. Arab countries have recently been affected by external dominance policies imposed by neighbouring countries regarding water, often struggling to find appropriate responses. The evolution of international water law has not been sufficient to effectively resolve conflicts between countries. However, this issue also highlights that water diplomacy alone is insufficient to address the multifaceted water issues in the region. Many of these problems stem from decades of failure to develop sustainable water management at the local level.

This section highlights the most important political documents related to the democratic transition in the Arab world. In this issue, we publish a number of documents from January 1 to February 28, 2023.

Antoine Nasri Messarra (b. 1938), a pioneer of Constitutional and Political Science in Lebanon and the Arab region, outlines a selection of the fundamental political ideas he developed over the course of his academic career. Messarra focuses on his critique of Arab political science in its reliance on a diasporic political culture that adopts European theories of nation building and applies them to Middle Eastern societies, without bringing to bear Arab-Islamic heritage in dealing with pluralism in those societies. Messarra argues that Arab production in political science has been dominated by two approaches. The first are diaspora approaches that draw on European Jacobite models , which have consequently failed to understand the Arab social dynamics. These include sectarianism studies that overlook ethnoreligious diversity and secularization research that rejects the Islamic constitutional tradition. The second (smaller) group are authentic approaches, which Messarra argues are grounded in reality and draw on the region’s heritage.

​ In order to keep pace with trends in Western studies that became popular in the early twenty-first century, this study addresses the status of political science in the Tunisian University, focusing on the Faculty of Law and Political Science. It monitors the Faculty’s relationship to public and private law, tracking its development and the challenges it faced. The study further examines the obstacles to its progression, its professionalism, and influence, as well as looking at its ability to stand up to international scrutiny.

This report includes documentation of the most important Palestinian facts and events related to the Arab-Israeli conflict in the period from Septemper 1 to October 31, 2022.

This study explore the concepts of populism and “the people,” linking them to ideology, hegemony, and the making of modern sport in Western liberal-capitalist democracies. While populism is widely seen as a useful way to understand oppositions between “the people” and elites, This study particularly interested here in what happens when self-styled populist political leaders actually govern, ostensibly on the people’s behalf. To illustrate this, the study consider two examples of self-styled populist leaders from different eras – Benito Mussolini and Donald Trump – that have used sport to promote narrow, ideologically laden, conceptions of “the people.” Through these examples the study argue that the concept of populism on its own does not provide a comprehensive understanding of political and cultural struggles in sport today, nor does it provide adequate guidelines for oppositional political strategies.