Latest Articles

The visibility of public health in world politics has increased due to epidemics such as HIV/AIDS, and tensions between public health and international trade, including those related to patents and access to essential medicines. Advocacy for raising the profile of public health on diplomatic agendas raises fundamental theoretical questions about public health: why should public health be higher on global diplomatic agendas? How should the pursuit of better public health globally be structured and implemented? This article explores answers to these questions provided by traditional theory on public health and analyzes the problems the anarchical context of international relations poses for such answers. A major part of this analysis utilizes theories from the discipline of international relations – using realism, institutionalism, liberalism, and social constructivism to illuminate theoretical challenges global health advocacy faces in making public health more important in world politics. These theories help identify a theoretical conundrum faced by public health, and the article considers various ways in which to handle this in light of the desire to increase the role public health plays in international relations.

The potential impact of the Covid- 19 pandemic on populist governments has been the subject of a heated debate among specialists. There are scholars for who the pandemic will negatively impact populist governments. Here, populist governments are perceived as ill-equipped to respond to the multifaced challenges risen by the complexity of the pandemic. Conversely, many scholars that argue that the pandemic will strengthen populist governments because populism flourishes during crises. This article contests these two narratives. It asserts that any evaluation of the impact of the pandemic on populist governments should distinguish between their actions and their discourse. Thus, the study undertakes an analysis of US president Trump’s discourse, demonstrating that during the first year of the pandemic, it is twofold. First appears a “disconnected discourse” that continuously questions the reality of the pandemic, despite the important proactive actions taken by his government to mitigate the pandemic's economic, social, and sanitary impacts. Second, a “demonstrative discourse” arises, in which the pandemic was instrumentalized to enhance the legitimacy of one of the most important and controversial elements of the populist discourse: the idea of external threat.

Economic inequality is one of the most pressing issues in the twenty-first century, given that a small minority controls the global economy and most influential power. This has led to an escalation of political instability and a decrease in social inclusion, as evidenced by studies related to the Arab Spring and the ongoing turmoil in the MENA. This quantitative study investigates the effect of capital formation and the rate of return on capital on economic inequality in countries of the region. The results demonstrated that the factors used to measure the formation of capital, such as total domestic savings and total fixed capital formation, positively correlate with economic inequality - increasing the inequality gap. Conversely, factors used to measure the rate of return on capital, such as real interest and the interest rate on deposits, correspond negatively with economic inequality. When the interest rate on deposits increases, economic inequality decreases. It is necessary to review fiscal and monetary policies to reform taxes and benefits to increase their impact on equity and redistribution, and to avoid the impact of capital and power accumulation.

This paper presents public opinion trends in the Arab region towards government performance in providing basic services, through the 2019/2020 Arab Index data issued by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies. It focuses on reviewing the Arab public opinion trends towards government performance in public policies and basic services; and comparing them with previous Arab Index data. In addition, it highlights the relationship between government performance evaluation and government trust, and how public services are assessed among the priorities of the Arab region's citizens. Finally, the paper briefly concludes with some insights on how Arab public opinion trends towards public health services and government trust affects the behaviour of citizens during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This study addresses the methodological dimension of the gap between social research and public policymaking in the Arab region. It demonstrates several intertwined factors that contributed to this phenomenon, the most important of which are: lack of trust between researchers and decision makers, methodological dependency, the absence of a scientific culture that promotes research based evaluation, the lack of intellectual and moral courage among researchers and weak demand for the use of multifaceted holistic approaches. The study concludes that the success of enhancing coordination between social science research and policymaking in the Arab region depends on the extent to which academic freedoms are respected, considering this constitutes one of the most important elements of scientific research and competency. Academia must also be allowed to fulfill its role in developing serious and applicable scientific research.

​This review discusses the main findings of the report issued by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral entitled The Global State of Democracy 2021: Building Resilience in a Pandemic Era.

This study examines Sudanese peace agreements during the period 1972 – 2020 by analyzing the roots of the conflicts between the political center and the peripheral regions, through the lens of the concept of the heritage of origin , which reflects the accumulation of historical grievances rooted in political, economic, and cultural marginalization. The study argues that, since the colonial era, the central governments concentrated power and development in the Nile Valley at the expense of other regions, which gave rise to demands for equitable participation that later evolved into armed rebellions. Despite the signing of several peace agreements—such as the Addis Ababa Agreement (1972), the Khartoum and Fashoda Agreements (1997), the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005), the Doha Document for Peace in Darfur (2011), and the Juba Agreement for Peace in Sudan (2020)—most of them relied on partial power- and wealth-sharing arrangements without addressing the structural roots of the conflicts. Added to this were the absence of trust between the parties, foreign mediation, the repeated violation of commitments, and the instrumentalization of agreements to serve short-term political interests. The findings confirm that the failure to sustain peace was a direct consequence of leaving the heritage of origin unaddressed, leading to the secession of South Sudan in 2011 and the continuation of armed conflicts in Darfur, the East, and the Two Areas. The study recommends rebuilding the foundations of peace on equal citizenship, fair development, and the recognition of cultural diversity as necessary conditions for breaking the cycle of war and achieving national stability.

Politicians are increasingly adopting populist rhetoric that is appealing to people's emotions and biases rather than their rational judgments. This rhetoric includes claims of representing the people (us) as opposed to the establishment and the traditional elite (them). Anti-elitist populism manifests in its opposition to facts, with populists becoming the main players who distort facts and spread disinformation. Therefore, populism and disinformation reinforce one other, creating a cycle of manipulation that undermines democracy. By conducting a comparative qualitative analysis of the speeches of Abdel Fattah El-Sisi in Egypt and Kais Saied in Tunisia, this study argues that there are four tactics, rely on disinformation, used by authoritarian populists to legitimize the obstruction of constitutional and institutional constraints and suppress the opposition: (1) constructing the people by creating the enemy; (2) attacking the media and democratic institutions; (3) creating illusion by amplifying achievements; and (4) employing conspiracy theory and misinformation to justify failure at fulfilling promises.

This study presents the results of an opinion poll conducted among Algerian and Sudanese citizens regarding the role and influence of the military in the process of democratic transition. The militaries of both countries have played a crucial role in the aftermath of the protests that have swept both countries. The study also investigates people’s opinions on democracy as a model of government in Algeria and Sudan. It focuses on a group of questions: How much do Algerian and Sudanese citizens trust the army? Do you agree that ‘democratic regimes are not good at preserving public order?’ What do you think of the statement ‘the democratic system may have its problems but it is better than the alternative?’ The study draws on data provided by the Arab Opinion Index, which has been published by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies every year since 2011.

This report reviews Algerian public confidence in the army based on the results of the Arab Opinion Index from 2011- 2019/2020 and places the respondents’ opinions in their historical context, which roughly spans the second half of President Abdelaziz Bouteflika’s rule and the rise of the Hirak popular movement in February 2019. It concludes that the army still enjoys the confidence of the majority of respondents, and that levels of confidence are governed by the societal perception of a role played by the army in the transition process, in addition to the absence of repression. Comparing trust in the army with other institutions, the report reveals that respondents express a lack of confidence in political parties, elected institutions, and the government in contrast to high confidence in the judiciary.