ORIENT II 2017: US policy in the Near and Middle East: Continuity and change

Your Items

The security-political implications of emergent digital technologies in the Gulf states

Christopher M. Davidson

In recent years the Gulf states have witnessed accelerating Internet access and social media penetration rates. In the context of their generally authoritarian environments (including a lack of freedom of expression), the co-option and control of such emergent digital technologies has unsurprisingly been taken very seriously by their ruling regimes, with evidence that all have gone to considerable lengths to try to keep at least one step ahead of any organised cyber dissent.

Christopher M. Davidson is the author, most recently, of From Sheikhs to Sultanism: Statecraft and Authority in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. His articles have appeared in the Journal of Democracy, Foreign Affairs and The New York Times. He is presently an associate fellow of the European Centre for International Affairs, edits the book series Power and Politics in the Gulf (co-published by Hurst & Co. and Oxford University Press USA), and is an editorial board member for the Journal of Labor and Society. He previously taught for twelve years at Durham University (as a lecturer, senior lecturer, then reader) and, prior to that, for three years at Zayed University in the United Arab Emirates (as an assistant professor, on both the Abu Dhabi and Dubai campuses). He has held visiting positions at Leiden University College in the Hague (as a fellow) and Kyoto University in Japan (as an associate professor); and in 2017 he was the Daoud Family Lecturer in Middle Eastern studies at Albion College, Michigan.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

Digitisation of the Arab world: A community approach?

Ayad Al-Ani

The digital sphere in the Arab world, which began to evolve at the dawn of the new millennium, was initially perceived as a catalyst for addressing the structural issues plaguing the Arab economy. This transformation, however, proved hard to control as the Arab Spring had shown the disruptive potential of technology in generating political voice. Digital transformation as an economic policy was therefore tightly supervised by the state class to prevent any undesired spillover. Consequently, the outcomes in both the economic and political spheres fell short of bringing about comprehensive improvements. The advent of climate change has now further intensified the economic crises in the Arab world, necessitating a search for more innovative and potentially more radical solutions. In this context, digitisation is finding new applications within the framework of Smart City concepts. The construction of these new-age cities, extending into cyberspace, holds the potential to bring about a radical transformation in the landscape of the Arab world. However, this transformation again is unfolding without an explicit discourse on possible new political and economic orientations. It is also taking place against the backdrop of a global multipolar restructuring process. This situation presents a critical decision for the Arab world: to align itself as a European periphery or to carve out its own distinct identity and political pole, whether that be Islamic, Asian, or otherwise. This decision – we must suspect – will carry with it implications for the usage of technology in the region.

Ayad Al-Ani is a professor extraordinary at the School of Public Leadership at Stellenbosch University in South Africa. He is also an Associated Member of the Einstein Center Digital Future in Berlin. He has served as the rector of the ESCP Europe Business School in Berlin and was an Executive Partner with Accenture.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

The failure of mediation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: historical junctures

Yaser Alashqar

In this essay, I examine three historical junctures in the failure of formal mediation in the Israeli- Palestinian conflict. The three historical junctures involve the United Nations partition plan in 1947, the autonomy framework of the Israeli-egyptian Camp David Accords in the late 1970s and the Madrid-Oslo negotiations in the 1990s. The essay ends with some reflections on future engagement in formal mediation at the policy and practice levels. Based on this historical and analytical overview, I clearly indicate that any effective mediation and future conflict resolution process must facilitate coherently and genuinely the implementation of the Palestinian right to self-determination beyond permanent occupation and oppressive autonomy. I also demonstrate through analysis and historical experience that any conclusive settlement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be based on sustainable peace, equality and justice.

Yaser Alashqar is lecturer in the school of law at Independent College in Dublin and a visiting professor in World Heritage Studies at University College Dublin in Ireland. His teaching and research focus on law and dispute resolution, including mediation, negotiation and arbitration. His academic and research interests also involve conflict, heritage and Israeli-Palestinian issues. He holds a PhD in Peace and Conflict Studies from Trinity College Dublin, and his recent published research includes Civil Society and Peacebuilding: Critical Review (2022) and Heritage in the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict: Sociopolitical Perspective (2022). He continues to work on training and research projects with european universities, government institutions and international organisations. He is also an academic member of the Centre for Palestine studies at the University of london and a frequent media commentator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

The 2023 war on Gaza: Iran between realpolitik and ideology

Mahjoob Zweiri and Thomas Bonnie James

The 2023 war in Gaza has become a focal point in international relations, attracting the attention of various nations with vested interests in the region. A prominent player in this conflict is Iran, which has played a significant role in shaping the discourse surrounding the Palestinian cause. This article aims to delve into the intricate web of Iran's perspective on the Palestine-Israel conflict, examining its historical development, the domestic political ramifications and the international reactions to Iran’s involvement. The article analyses Iran's stance on the Gaza conflict, focusing on its rhetoric, key themes and diplomatic nuances. It also explores the relationship between Iran and its allies, examining its involvement in the events of 7 October and the Hamas attack on Israel. Iran faces a difficult decision of intervention and restraint, with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's realist approach providing context. examining the potential acceleration of Iran's nuclear programme as a response to the conflict highlights the correlation between military strategies and geopolitical considerations. lastly, the article delves into the intricate relationship between Iranian politics and public sentiment, highlighting the diverse perspectives within Iranian circles and the varying views of the Iranian public. It also examines the surprising lack of grassroots support for the Palestinian cause within Iran, highlighting the influence of media, social dynamics and economic concerns on public opinion.

Mahjoob Zweiri is Professor in Contemporary Politics and History of the Middle East with a focus on Iran and the Gulf region and Director of Gulf studies Center at Qatar University. Before joining Qatar University in 2010, he was senior researcher in Middle East Politics and Iran at the Center for Strategic Studies, University of Jordan. From 2003 until 2006 he was a research fellow and then Director of the Centre for Iranian Studies in the Institute for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at Durham University. He has more than 90 publications in areas such as Iran and Contemporary Middle East History and Politics, Gulf Studies, Social Sciences in the University of the Future and Artificial Intelligence and Social Sciences. His latest book is Arab-Iranian Relations Since the Arab Uprisings (2023).

Thomas Bonnie James is a PhD Candidate in the Gulf Studies Program, Qatar University.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

The war on Gaza: carnage of hard power

Walid Kazziha

The attack by Hamas against the Israeli settlements on Gaza’s northern border on October 7 had the limited objective of taking as many captives as possible to exchange them later, with a growing number of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons. However, the operation, while it did achieve its objective, seemed to go sour as anarchy prevailed with the flow of undisciplined crowds into the settlements, precipitating acts of violence. The reaction to Hamas resulted in a war of vengeance against Gaza, with clear indications that the carnage created has rendered the towns and villages of the Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank unfit for living. Witnessing the huge destruction of life and property, the world woke up to the tragedy of the Palestinians. Calls were made to end the violence and the option of a two-state solution gained momentum. Yet historical precedence seems to defy such a course of action. On previous occasions when the world attended to the various sides and parties of the conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbours, it was often Israeli reluctance to make the necessary territorial concessions that led to failure. The typical syndrome followed a familiar pattern, in which Israeli leaders begin having disagreements and friction among themselves, then their American allies fall into confusion and inaction resulted. This has plagued the course of the so-called peace process between Israelis and Palestinians since 1967. Biden has made it clear that he not only favours the two-state solution, but that in preparation for its realisation, Netanyahu should distance himself from the extremists and accept the Palestinian Authority as a negotiating partner. Netanyahu has already rejected Biden’s recommendations and opted for a defiant position. In all probability, Biden will shy away from a confrontation and the call for a two-state solution will be frozen. Consequently, Israel will continue to rely on its hard power without relinquishing its hold on the territories it occupied in 1967.

Walid Kazziha is Professor of Political Science, several times chairman of department and former Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of Political Science at The American University in Cairo. He is a specialist in the field of Middle East Politics, with particular reference to the politics of the Arab East, Egypt and the Gulf region. He has taught a wide range of courses focusing on government and politics of the Middle East, the Arab-Israeli conflict, civil society in the Middle East, political Islam, Arab political and social thought, the Middle East in Global Politics and conflicts in the Gulf. He has authored and co-authored several books, including Egypt's Tahrir Revolution, Revolutionary Transformation in the Arab World, Palestine in the Arab Dilemma and a monograph, The Social History of Southern Syria.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

A Palestinian perspective: post-7 October 2023

Hiba Husseini

It was against the backdrop of over a century of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that the Hamas assault on Israel threw the entire Middle east into turmoil on 7 October, redirecting a trajectory that the United States had been pursuing with some Arab states eager to normalise relations with Israel with little, if any, serious regard to the Palestinian plight. A new geopolitical and strategic architecture will likely evolve in the aftermath of the assault without the possibility to return to the status quo ante. A new era for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is emerging and another era for some regional and Arab states, especially Qatar, which is playing a mediating function in the release of the hostages and the Palestinian prisoners. The world may very well become multipolar as Iran’s role also unfolds in this war. One thing is for sure, the “Question of Palestine”, which started in 1917, is still shaping the Middle East and is central in the emerging new Middle East order.

Hiba Husseini chaired the Legal Committee to Final Status Negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis and has served as legal advisor to peace process negotiations since 1994. She has written widely on the peace process, the rule of law, economic development and Jerusalem, recently co-authoring with Dr. Yossi Beilin the "Holy Land Confederation" (2022), an enabler for the two-state solution. Among her other most recent publications are Palestine from a Flawed Democracy to Authoritarianism (2023) and Participation of East Jerusalem in Future Palestinian Parliamentary and Presidential Elections: Challenges and Policy Options (2023). She serves on the Board of Trustees of Al Quds University and the American Board of the Middle East Partnership for Peace Fund (MEPPA).

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

Saudi Arabia, Iran and the complexity of conflict mediation

Simon Mabon

In early March 2023, years of back-channel diplomatic efforts reached a zenith as Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to normalise relations with each other. Seven years after relations were suspended following the fallout from the execution of the Saudi Shi’a cleric Nimr al-Nimr, the normalisation agreement set out a process of re-opening diplomatic missions and create the conditions for greater collaboration.1 Reached after years of track II efforts, the agreement was heralded as a major step towards building peace across the Middle East. Yet it is not a panacea for conflict, but rather is a necessary part of a portfolio of moves to improve regional relations. In this short essay I reflect on the ways in which the normalisation agreement may contribute towards peace-building and mediation efforts across the Middle East.

Simon Mabon is Professor of International Politics at Lancaster University, where he directs SEPAD (Sectarianism, Proxies and Desectarianization Project). He is the author and editor of 12 books including The Struggle for Supremacy in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia and Iran (Cambridge University Press, 2023); Houses built on sand: Sectarianism, revolution and violence in the Middle East (Manchester University Press, 2020); British Foreign Policy Since WWII (Routledge, 2016); The Origins of ISIS (IB Tauris, 2016); and Saudi Arabia and Iran: Soft Power Rivalry in the Middle East (IB Tauris, 2013). He has published 45 articles and book chapters in a range of Middle East and International Relations journals, including: Review of International Studies; Middle East Journal; Middle East Policy; British Journal of Middle East Studies; Politics, Religion and Ideology; and Third World Quarterly. From 2016 to 2017, he served as academic advisor to the House of Lords International Relations committee report into the UK’s relations with the Middle East. He regularly consults with governmental agencies and for international news outlets, including the BBC, CNN, CNBC, Sky, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiyya, France 24 and Deutsche Welle.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

Third-party mediation and peace-making processes in Yemen: Issues and challenges

Ibrahim Galal Fakirah

The legacy of third-party mediation and peace-making in Yemen has not succeeded in holding long. Between 2000 and 2023, there have been more than ten third-party mediation initiatives in Yemen, by both regional states and multilateral organisations. None of these third-party mediation efforts, nor ensuing peace or de-escalation agreements, have been durable or contributed to a durable peace agreement lasting longer than three years. The longest surviving deal was the GCC initiative, which lasted for less than three years and delayed the outbreak of full-scale violence in the country due to short-termism, poor management of spoilers, flaws in agreement design and ambitious implementation timelines and regional interference, among other reasons. The fall of each process has contributed to a gradual increase in structural violence and a deepening of grievances and the intensity of regional interference. While the Yemeni government has been key to all processes, the protracted nature of the conflict has expanded the scope of parties, with the rise of regionally-backed new hybrid groups that continue to shape conflict and peace trajectories at a sub-national levels. It is interesting that the overlap of mediation and facilitation efforts pursued by regional states and multilateral organisations have complicated negotiation dynamics, creating greater manoeuvre room for armed groups than for the Yemeni government but also weakening the credibility of the UN when uncoordinated.

Ibrahim Galal Fakirah is a Non-Resident Scholar with the Middle East Institute’s (MEI) Arabian Peninsula Program and a senior consultant. He has worked with donors and international organisations such as the United Nations, the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) and Sussex University's Institute of Development Studies in research and advisory capacities, occasionally briefing audiences – including think tanks, diplomatic corps, UN officials, the private sector and humanitarian organisations – and taking part in Track II events related to Yemen and the MENA region. His research examines third-party-led peace and dialogue processes in Yemen, the proliferation of armed non-state actors and their implications for the implementation of peace agreements, post-war security orders and stabilisation efforts, the politics of social assistance in fragile and conflict-affected states, violent extremism and the foreign and defence policies of the Gulf and Western states in Yemen. Prior to joining MEI, Ibrahim was a Visiting Scholar at Macquarie University’s Department of Security Studies and Criminology in Australia.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

Resolving the Libyan conflict: Twelve years of failure

Youssef Mohammad Sawani

This article sheds light on the mediation that the international community and the United Nations have been attempting in Libya ever since the Arab spring reached this Arab North African country in 2011, only to be plagued by conflict and episodes of civil war, violence, human rights violations and foreign meddling. The author examines these efforts and assesses the role of the supranational organisation in conflict mediation, drawing lessons and conclusions that are valid for the entire MENA region and beyond. While mediation efforts continue unabated, the Libyan crisis seems to defy resolution. Reasons behind the failure could easily be identified by resorting to cliches that echo the orientalist tradition referring to the crisis and the failures to Libya’s lack of state and national identity. However, this article argues that the various mediation efforts failed because of their inherent deficiencies and the destructive effect of foreign powers’ rivalry, particularly between UNSC permanent members. At both the national and international levels, consensus has most frequently been hindered by conflicting foreign interests.

Youssef Mohammad Sawani is Professor of Politics and International Relations at the Department of Political Science at the University of Tripoli, Libya, where he has been engaged in teaching, research and other academic activities since 1985. For years, he was Director General and Director of Studies at the Center for Arab Unity Studies in Beirut, and was the editor-in-chief of its Al Mustaqbal Al-Arabi monthly journal. Between 2016-2021, he worked as the editor of Contemporary Arab Affairs, a peer-reviewed journal published by University of California Press. He is affiliated to a number of international entities, NGOs and research centres, and works as a consultant for a number of local and international institutions. He has also participated in and organised many seminars and conferences, and frequently publishes in the English and Arabic languages. He holds a PhD in International Relations from the University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

The role of Gulf states in conflict in Sudan

Umer Karim

Sudanese engagement with the Arab Gulf states has seen various ups and downs since the country’s independence, yet the relationship encountered serious challenges when the General Omar Hassan al-Bashir-led Revolutionary Command Council for National Salvation assumed power after a military coup in 1989, advancing a foreign policy based on the ideological contours developed by the Sudanese Islamist politician Hassan Al-Turabi. The steps taken by the regime soon created tensions with the Arab Gulf states, in particular Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. There were three main points of friction that impacted upon the country’s relationship with these Gulf states: Sudan’s support for Iraqi invasion of Kuwait; its close relationship with the revolutionary regime in Iran, Saudi Arabia’s arch-rival; and the hosting of Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden. This article traces the development of the role of Gulf states in the security environment in Sudan since then and how the Sudanese ruling elites have attempted to develop extensive political, cultural and economic connections with different Arab Gulf states, before and after the security apparatus removed President al-Bashir on 11 April 2019, when he was replaced by the Transitional Military Council as the collective head of state of Sudan.

Umer Karim is a doctoral researcher at the Department of Political Science and International Studies of the University of Birmingham, focusing on Saudi foreign policy and decision-making, and its implications for the politics and security of the Middle East. His broad research interests also include Middle Eastern politics and international relations as well as peace and conflict studies. Additionally, Umer Karim is Associate Fellow at the King Faisal Centre for Research and Islamic Studies and Fellow at the Sectarianism, Proxies and De-sectarianisation (SEPAD) project, based at Lancaster University's Richardson Institute.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

Prospects of rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran

Aditya Anshu

The MENA region has long been marred by geopolitical tensions and conflicts, with the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran standing out as a prominent and enduring source of instability. This article explores the prospects of rapprochement, shedding light on the potential for reconciliation and its implications for regional peace and stability, reviewing the key drivers motivating rapprochement, including economic interests, shared security concerns and the desire for increased regional influence. It also considers the role of external factors, such as the United States and Russia, in facilitating or obstructing potential reconciliation efforts and examines the potential consequences and challenges associated with a thaw in relations. The strained bilateral relationship, characterised by proxy conflicts, religious divides and regional power struggles, has had profound consequences on the region. However, recent developments and shifts in regional dynamics have sparked cautious optimism about the possibility of improved relations between these two influential nations. The implications of a Saudi-Iran rapprochement could be far-reaching, impacting not only the geopolitical landscape of the MENA region but also global energy markets, the resolution of regional conflicts and the broader prospects for peace and stability. In conclusion, the prospects of rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the MENA region present a complex and evolving dynamic with significant implications. By analysing the factors driving this potential reconciliation and assessing the potential outcomes, this article offers insights into a critical issue that has the potential to reshape the future of the MENA region.

Aditya Anshu is an Assistant Professor of International Relations, Dept of International Relations, Abu Dhabi University, UAE. He earned his Ph.D. in international relations from JNU, New Delhi, India. Previously, he has worked with Bennett University and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, India. His rich experience of internships and study includes the Embassy of India in the United States and Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, South Korea.

Purchase the article here:

7,90 € incl. VATAdd to basket

Access article with subscription:

Enter

Log in or purchase a subscription with archive access to read this article online.

ORIENT II 2017: US policy in the Near and Middle East: Continuity and change

Orient II 2024: Aspects of digital transformation from the Gulf to North Africa

Orient II 2024: Aspects of digital transformation from the Gulf to North Africa

ORIENT I 2024: Perspectives on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

ORIENT I 2024: Perspectives on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

ORIENT IV 2023: Conflict mediation and rapprochement across the MENA region

ORIENT IV 2023: Conflict mediation and rapprochement across the MENA region