Number of results to display per page
Search Results
1242. Secularist and Islamist Constitutional and Political Concepctions in the Modern Muslim World: The Cases of Kemalist Turkey and Khomeini’s Iran
- Author:
- Nikola Gjorshoski
- Publication Date:
- 05-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- Modern constitutional and political concepts, in a broad sense, represent an expressed codification of the elements of value that structure the relevant society or the particular group that tries to project or channel them through the existing order. The secularism vs. Islamism dichotomy is a part of such a conceptual framework. The author elaborates and compares both ultimate constitutional and political designs, specifying them through the example of Turkey and Iran, as well as to shows the basic characteristics through the prism of their political legitimacy, the organization of power, the human rights and freedoms, as well as the possibility of political activism. The thesis that the author notes develop in the direction of a warning that the extremes contained in the constitutional provisions in the vividly ideologically divided societies can be a source of conflict and/or can generate instability or suffocation of the pluralism in the political arena.
- Topic:
- Islam, Politics, Constitution, Islamism, and Secularism
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Turkey, and Middle East
1243. United Kingdom’s Foreign Policy towards Syrian Refugees
- Author:
- Najam-ud-din Muhammad Farani, Iram Khalid, and Muhammad Rizwan Abbassi
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Political Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- United Kingdom’s (UK) foreign policy towards the Syrian crisis is quite significant with reference to the entry of Syrian refugees into Europe and the strategic balance of power in the Middle East. UK being a major power in the European continent understands the importance of sharing the humanitarian responsibility for protecting, aiding and accommodating the Syrian refugees. The British Government is aware of the fact that it is not only providing humanitarian assistance to the Syrian refugees but also going to host their hostilities and affiliations in the ongoing conflict inside Syria. The arrival of Syrian refugees and asylum seekers in UK presents a complex case of national versus humanitarian concerns in foreign policy analysis. This research paper is an attempt to focus on the convergence and divergence of interests between UK’s Humanitarian assistance policy directed towards Syrian refugees and the British national security interests with reference to the strategic balance of power in the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Humanitarian Aid, Refugees, Syrian War, and Asylum
- Political Geography:
- United Kingdom, Europe, Middle East, and Syria
1244. Stabilizing Disarray in the Muslim World: Turkey and the European Union
- Author:
- Muhammad Nadeem Mirza, Lubna Abid Ali, and Irfan Hasnain Qaisrani
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Political Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- This study focuses on the growth of transnational forces and increased global interdependence in the Post-Cold War period, posing serious challenges to conservative regimes in the Middle East – manifested by popular uprisings for economic and political change, beginning 2010 in Tunisia. Since then the Arab states of Middle East are in turmoil. The situation has become complex due to the presence of Al-Qaeda network and ISIS (‘Islamic’ State of Iraq and Syria) radicals in the Middle East and Mediterranean region. Such non state extremists groups are a collective threat to future Europe also. On the other hand various countries of the Middle East and gulf region, have been engaged in waging the proxy wars against each other in order to achieve their specific objectives. Geographically, historically and politically Turkey has been a bridge between Middle East and Europe. The underlying assumption of this study establishes Turkey’s matured foreign policy not only as a model for struggling states of the Muslim World but holds keys to emerging threats to Europe. The study explores possibilities of Turkey to be central player not only for the resolution of regional issues but also as an active player at the global level.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, European Union, and Islamic State
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, and Mediterranean
1245. “The War As I See It:” Youth Perceptions and Knowledge of the Lebanese Civil War
- Author:
- Nour El Bejjani Noureddine
- Publication Date:
- 10-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
- Abstract:
- Since the negotiated political settlement that ended the war in 1990, no serious attempt has been made to deal with the war’s legacy. Accountability for human rights violations committed during the conflict has been absent. There has been no effective truth-seeking process, formal acknowledgement of victims’ suffering, or the establishment of an accurate and objective war narrative. This has allowed political and social factions to compete for control of the historical record, with the different sides blaming each other, resulting in multiple politicized and fragmented narratives. Because school curricula do not cover Lebanon’s war or recent history, today most accounts of the conflict are based on personal memories transmitted from generation to generation by family members and neighbors who survived the war. This has left young people without an official source of information about the war to help them to understand it and its legacy, although it often forms part of their personal history and identity. As a result, the post-war generation, and the larger public, does not know what really happened during the conflict. With waves of instability and political violence that risk spiraling out of control, recalling the prewar era for many who lived through the war, young people are left vulnerable to political manipulation.
- Topic:
- Civil War, Transitional Justice, Youth, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Lebanon
1246. Nuclear Governance and Legislation in Four Nuclear-Armed Democracies
- Author:
- Avner Cohen and Brandon Mok
- Publication Date:
- 09-2017
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies
- Abstract:
- The report presents a set of comparative raw data on the question of how four Western democratic nuclear-weapon states— the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Israel—handle the essential tension between nuclear weapons (which require secrecy) and liberal democracy. The initial intent of this work was to assist Dr. Cohen in his preparations for an unprecedented hearing at the Israeli High Court of Justice in September 2017, whereby the Court would hear a petition, signed by over 100 Israeli citizens, calling for regulation and oversight of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission. The petitioners cited the legal lacuna under which Israel’s nuclear activities operate, devoid of oversight and beyond the realm of law, in violation of fundamental democratic principles. In particular, the study assesses the comprehensiveness—the breadth and depth—of the legislative, regulatory, scientific, and policy mechanisms that each of these four democratic states have created to govern its nuclear affairs in the following categories or parameters: legislation, organizations (directly responsible for either civilian and military applications of nuclear materials or both), regulation, oversight, secrecy, and policy making. Such material has never before been publicly available in a condensed form in one location, making this study of use to anyone interested in the problem of governing the atom. It will be updated as structures and policy change.
- Topic:
- Nuclear Weapons, Military Affairs, Democracy, and Civil-Military Relations
- Political Geography:
- United Kingdom, Europe, Middle East, Israel, France, North America, and United States of America
1247. Islam: Between Averroes and al-Baghdadi
- Author:
- Dmitri Trofimov
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
- Institution:
- East View Information Services
- Abstract:
- The Waves OF DesTaBILIZaTIOn in the Middle east that have risen high in recent years, terrorist acts that follow one another, persecu- tion of those who think differently or follow different religions in the Muslim countries and even outside them bring to mind, once more, Prof. huntington. Indeed, can Islam and violence, Islam and democracy and, in the final analysis, Islamic and non-Islamic values cohabitate within the frames of the steadily globalizing community of men? are we dealing with a distant and unavoidable echo of a civilization- al conflict rooted in the past or should these waves be treated as growing pains of a relatively young and still highly passionary organism caused by changes and external civilizational pressure?
- Topic:
- Globalization, Religion, Terrorism, Political stability, and Destabilization
- Political Geography:
- Middle East
1248. Solitaire Arabian Style
- Author:
- A. Frolov
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
- Institution:
- East View Information Services
- Abstract:
- LAST SPRING, an event in the Arab world shocked everyone. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) withdrew their ambassadors from Doha, the capital of Qatar, their ally. One of the smallest members of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC) was accused of supporting “anyone threat- ening the security and stability of the GCC whether as groups or individ- uals – via direct security work or through political influence ... and hos- tile media.” On June 5, 2017, the KSA, UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt officially dis- continued diplomatic relations and all types of communication with Qatar. Later, they were joined by the Maldives, Mauritius and Mauretania. Jordan and Djibouti lowered the level of their diplomatic representations in Doha. Several African countries – Senegal, Niger and Chad – recalled their ambassadors. Kuwait and Oman, both GCC mem- bers, stayed away from the action. Later, the three initiators handed Doha a list of 13 demands to end a major Gulf crisis, insisting that Qatar should shut down the Al Jazeera network, close a Turkish military base and scale down ties with Iran. They gave Qatar 10 days to comply with the demands and agree to annu- al audits in the following 10 years.1 Qatar rejected this ultimatum as inter- ference in its sovereignty. Possible repercussions notwithstanding, what happened to Qatar can be described as a manifestation of the deeply rooted social and political changes in the Arab East caused by the color revolutions unfolding amid globalization, informatization, democratization, gradual destruction of the traditional values of Eastern societies, and the frantic efforts to find adequate answers to these challenges.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, and Gulf Nations
1249. How to Reverse Five Years of Failure on Bahrain
- Author:
- Human Rights First
- Publication Date:
- 02-2016
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Human Rights First
- Abstract:
- On the fifth anniversary of the mass protests in Bahrain that threatened to bring down the country’s autocratic regime, Bahrainis continue to suffer severe repression and political instability. Although the scale of mass arrests and torture the government used to suppress the uprising in March, April, and May of 2011 has diminished, and there have been some largely cosmetic reforms introduced since then, arbitrary arrests and torture in custody continue. Leading human rights activists and peaceful opposition leaders who were able to work relatively unimpeded since 2011 are now in jail, forced into exile, or facing trumped-up charges. The leading civil society and nonviolent political opposition figures arrested and tortured in 2011 remain in prison and there seems to be no prospect of any political dialogue between the government and opposition groups. The protests have not stopped, and a minority have taken on a violent edge, with over a dozen policemen killed since 2011. The country’s prisons are bulging with political detainees, many of whom were sentenced in mass trials after an unfair judicial process. This blueprint draws on dozens of interviews with Bahraini human rights defenders, civil society activists, journalists, academics, families of detainees, lawyers, U.S. government officials, and others. Despite repeated requests for permission to access Bahrain, Human Rights First has been denied entry to the country since 2012. This report examines conditions in Bahrain, the strengths and shortcomings of the U.S. response, and potential opportunities for the U.S. government to support civil society and strengthen respect for human rights. Though the smallest country in the Middle East, Bahrain exemplifies several of the major challenges for U.S. policy in the region. 2016 promises to be a defining year as a series of issues converge to threaten Bahrain, including: sectarian tensions exploited by ISIL and other Sunni extremists and by Shi’a-dominated Iran; economic vulnerability linked to sharply falling oil prices; corruption and political instability; a lack of reform leaving the root grievances of the large scale public protests unresolved; and U.S. government support for an authoritarian status quo seen as the best way of protecting major military investments—in Bahrain’s case, the U.S. Naval Fifth Fleet base. This year will also be important as President Obama shapes his legacy in the Middle East. In 2009, at the start of his presidency, he delivered a message of hope in Cairo: “America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. And that is why we will support them everywhere.” Much has changed in the intervening years. In his speech to the U.N. General Assembly in September 2015, President Obama opted for analysis rather than exhortation, noting, “repression cannot forge the social cohesion for nations to succeed. The history of the last two decades proves that in today’s world, dictatorships are unstable. The strongmen of today become the spark of revolution tomorrow.” He continued: “I believe a government that suppresses peaceful dissent is not showing strength; it is showing weakness and it is showing fear. History shows that regimes who fear their own people will eventually crumble, but strong institutions built on the consent of the governed endure long after any one individual is gone.” Yet the U.S. government’s handling of the enduring crisis in Bahrain has too often failed to draw obvious conclusions from the administration’s own analysis of the detrimental impact of human rights violations on stability and progress. As a result, in the absence of actions and policies that would suggest the contrary, many in Bahrain and across the region view the Obama Administration as supportive of the repressive leadership in Manama. This support for the dictatorship is rendering Bahrain less stable, undermining U.S. efforts to prevent violent extremism, and further damaging Washington’s credibility in the region.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Foreign Aid, Reform, and Protests
- Political Geography:
- United States, Middle East, Bahrain, and Manama
1250. Second Doha Meeting on Peace and Security in Afghanistan
- Author:
- Paolo Cotta-Ramusino
- Publication Date:
- 01-2016
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
- Abstract:
- On 23-24 January 2016, approximately 55 senior participants from a wide range of backgrounds gathered in Doha to discuss the shared goal of peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan. The meeting was a non-official (“academic”) exploration of current issues and not an official negotiation. It was held in the spirit of mutual respect and non-discrimination. All participants recognized the importance of dialogue, and many had traveled very far to participate in these discussions. The hope is that the points discussed in these non-official meetings be considered by all official negotiations. All expressed appreciation to the government of Qatar for allowing this meeting to take place and for the relevant support. There is a unanimous consensus that these meetings should be continued on a regular basis. The goal of the meeting was to explore the options for a ladder or steps toward a stable peace in an independent, unified Afghanistan that would reflect the values, including Islamic values, of the people of Afghanistan, while recognizing the diversity of the Afghans. Discussions showed that there were many shared concerns. These areas of commonality create opportunities for progress. Dialogue is needed to determine the steps forward to addressing these concerns. 1. Peace is an urgent need. Decades of war that have been imposed on Afghanistan, have had a devastating impact on all Afghans. People are waiting impatiently for peace. If progress is not made soon, many fear the country may face other threats that might further complicate the process. 2. Military confrontation must end. The sovereignty of Afghanistan and the desired peace and stability will ultimately be achieved via political cooperation within a framework of legitimacy established by an appropriate constitution. Foreign troops must eventually leave Afghanistan. 3. Some participants believe that the Constitution should be amended, while others believe that the constitution should be substantially rewritten. Concrete proposals should be discussed in detail in future meetings. 4. Outside forces should not control the politics of Afghanistan. Instead, international technical, economic and cultural cooperation should be promoted. 5. The freedom for all parties to discuss the path to peace needs to be ensured from now on. The highest priority in this regard is enabling all sides to sit together. Blacklists should be eliminated and freedom of movement should be guaranteed. Visas should be facilitated for those to attend such discussions. All agreed that the Taliban should have an office and an address. 6. To foster dialogue among all parties, some participants invoked Afghanistan’s long-established tradition of the Jirga. A peace Jirga of credible, impartial Afghans could be convened, perhaps drawn from participants at this conference. Other institutions, such as Pugwash, could also provide a forum, but Afghans must lead. It was pointed out that the Doha dialogue and its follow-ups do not interfere with the current quadrilateral talks. 7. A ceasefire should be part of negotiations. 8. The protection of civilians and an end to civilian casualties are shared goals and high priorities. The recent increase in civilian casualty rates, including the heavy toll on children and women, was noted. All sides should ensure accountability and the prosecution of abuses. 9. Constitutional issues are of primary concern and need to be discussed in specific detail. Afghanistan should have an Islamic government. According to some participants, the present constitution needs to be changed, provided that it be based on Islam and enforce national sovereignty. A fundamental concern is that any constitution should ensure there will be no monopoly of power and no discrimination against people with different religions and backgrounds. 10. It was noted that peace can create a better environment for economic development, which will benefit all the people of Afghanistan. The role of civil society, freedom of expression, and education according to Islamic principles in achieving these goals was agreed. 11. The activities that are performed under the name of Daesh in Afghanistan are a foreign phenomenon and are rejected by the Afghan people. 12. All emphasize the need to uphold the rights of women, and to end violence against women. Some believe these points need to be very clearly defined, and in particular to provide guarantees regarding women’s rights. There should be increased accountability for human rights abuses. 13. Health and education issues are a priority independent of the various political positions. 14. Protection of public properties such as schools, medical facilities, and the country’s infrastructure is essential. People who commit crimes against them should be prosecuted. 15. There is the need to address the devastation to society from past decades. Drugs, high unemployment and corruption have all taken a high toll on Afghan society. Gains that have been made in terms of increased life expectancy, increased access to health and education, and improvements to the economic structures should be maintained. 16. Threats to society from remnants of war, including unexploded ordnance, must be addressed. 17. All sides share the desire for future engagement with the outside world, and welcome friendship and cooperation with the international community based on mutual respect. Support from the international community in helping to build up Afghanistan, including its roads and schools, will be welcomed by all sides. 18. Participants expressed the strong desire of continuing the series of meetings like the two recent Pugwash meetings in Doha.
- Topic:
- Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Reconciliation
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Middle East