Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Interference Political Geography Middle East

1. Syria and Seismic Shifts in Middle East Politics with Bassam Haddad (Episode 29)

Author:
Sahar Aziz and Bassam Haddad
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
Abstract:
Syria's complex history and politics led to the overthrow of Bashar Al Assad on December 8, 2024 – as unexpected as the Arab Spring revolutions that gripped the Middle East thirteen years earlier. Located at the center of regional competition, the nation of Syria will continue to experience foreign intervention from its neighbors, as well as the United States. Meanwhile, the millions of Syrian refugees outside the country are gradually returning to rebuild their homeland. Host Sahar Aziz (https://law.rutgers.edu/bio/sa1356) speaks with Professor Bassam Haddad (https://schar.gmu.edu/profiles/bhaddad) about the origins of Syria’s uprising in 2011 that culminated in the overthrow of the Assad regime in 2024, the current uncertainty of Syria in regional politics, and what to expect in U.S. Middle East policy under the second Trump administration.
Topic:
Syrian War, Foreign Interference, Bashar al-Assad, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

2. France in the Eastern Mediterranean and the MENA region’s geopolitical competition: French grandeur or European sovereignty?

Author:
Toni Alaranta
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The global rivalry between the US and China, as well as geopolitical competition and instability in the EU’s southern neighbourhood, are perceived by France as urgent matters requiring stronger EU foreign policy, conceptualized as European sovereignty. The French foreign policy elite are still largely committed to the idea of France’s exceptional role in the world, and to the extent that the EU as a whole fails to live up to the tasks presumed by France, continue their attempts at forging coalitions of the willing. France has in recent years built a web of strategic partnerships, for example with Greece, the Republic of Cyprus, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt, through which it aims to govern the instability in the EU’s southern neighbourhood. The aim is also to deter regional adversaries such as Turkey, a strategy that needs to be re-evaluated due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. France often equates its national interests with those of the EU. While this can be seen to enhance European sovereignty, it also risks increasing the perception that the EU would be a participant in various Middle Eastern conflicts. This undermines the EU’s ability to function as an objective broker and anchor of norms.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Hegemony, Foreign Interference, and Competition
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, France, North Africa, Mediterranean, and MENA

3. Iran Protests: Limitations of foreign support to protests

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
National Council of Resistance of Iran has said more than 400 Iranians have been killed and over 20,000 arrested since the breakout of nation-wide protests in Iran. Popular unrests and violence have been sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, three days after she was being detained by ‘morality police’ for claims of violating hijab laws.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Protests, Foreign Interference, and Civil Unrest
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

4. Cyber Challenges and Foreign Influence in the Upcoming Knesset Elections

Author:
David Siman-Tov, Tamir Hayman, and Amos Hervitz
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
In advance of the forthcoming Knesset elections, there are heightened efforts to obstruct foreign interference. Yet while most preventive activity focuses on technological attacks on the voting process and information systems relevant to the campaign, the efforts to grapple with malign influence on internal political discourse through the spread of fake news, verbal incitement, and more are insufficient. What should Israel do to confront the threat in the most effective fashion?
Topic:
Security, Elections, Cybersecurity, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Middle East and Israel

5. Macron Put Down, France in Crisis: Implications for Israel

Author:
Remi Daniel
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
As a result of the recent elections in France, President Macron no longer enjoys a majority in parliament, and it remains unclear how he will be able to continue to lead his country. This unusual situation points to a severe political crisis that will require the various actors to adopt or devise new political methods. Beyond the internal significance for France, what are the implications for Israel?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Elections, Leadership, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Israel, and France

6. Afghanistan: Before Time Runs Out

Author:
Owen Kirby
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:
The withdrawal of remaining U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan is nearly complete. As they go, the country begins a new, uncertain chapter in a long uncertain history. With the U.S. and our allies having made significant investments and great sacrifices in an attempt to develop self-sustaining Afghan institutions – and the Taliban now rampaging through the countryside – this is the moment of truth for the country’s government and post-9/11 political order. Whether Afghanistan’s institutions, security forces, and civil society prove sufficiently resilient to meet current challenges is not solely a matter of local capacity and resolve (or wisdom of previous donor decisions). Nor is it a matter of free choice between competing political views, as Afghans are not going to the voting booth to decide the outcome. It is equally about the commitment of the U.S. and our allies to continue supporting the equality of Afghan women and minorities, rule of law, free speech, and basic human rights. These are not foreign impositions, as some might argue, but rather vital weapons, absent U.S. troops, in the Afghan people’s own struggle against extremism and political regression. For many, there is justifiable fatigue with America’s “forever war” and its costs; but the Taliban’s repressive rule and its consequences are not a specter of another lifetime. It has only been 20 years since Afghan girls were banned from going to school; women barred from the workforce and life outside the home; and summary justice, including stoning and decapitation, for transgressions against the Taliban’s medieval code meted out in the national stadium. It has only been 17 years since Afghans were first given the constitutional right to choose their leadership at the ballot box. Progress is recent, and the Taliban is determined to make it reversible.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Development, Military Strategy, Transition, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

7. American Invasion And Withdrawals Post 9/11

Author:
Ibrahim Karatas
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:
Transatlantic Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:
When the United States was hit by al-Qaida's terrorist attack on 11 September 2001 (hereafter 9/11 attacks), not only Americans but the whole world was shocked: The world’s only superpower was attacked at home and had lost more than three thousand people. To take revenge for the attack as well as to prevent new ones, the Bush administration decided to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, which they claimed were sheltering and supporting al-Qaida. Afghanistan was invaded on 7 October 2001 because the US wanted (1) to eliminate Osama bin Laden (the mastermind of 9/11) and al-Qaida; (2) to remove the Taliban group from power and bring stability to Afghanistan by creating a democratic and peaceful state.[1] The US Army subsequently invaded Iraq in 2003, claiming that Saddam Hussain was supporting terrorism and producing chemical weapons. There were also allegations that the Hussain regime was behind the 9/11 attacks, but it was never proven. The US eventually removed both Taliban and Saddam Hussain from power and captured Hussain, who was later judged and executed by the new Iraqi government on 30 December 2006. US special forces killed Laden on 2 May 2011. As of today, the US has killed its two archenemies and changed regimes allegedly supporting terrorism in both Afghanistan and Iraq, yet could not bring stability. What is more, the remaining US troops are preparing to leave the two countries. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq is in better condition than the pre-invasion era as both states have failed, lack a strong authority, and cannot !ght terrorism. In Afghanistan, the Taliban was the enemy to be removed, however the US’s recent agreement with the organization has paved the way for re-control of the country by the group. On the other hand, Iraq has become a land of widespread terrorism, and the country is more divided than before, not mentioning Iranian in"uence on Baghdad. Based on the current situation, my arguments are that (1) the US is about to make the same mistake it did in Vietnam, and (2) Afghanistan and Iraq might again become the hub of terrorist organizations as well as regional rivalries. Although I do not approve of the US invasions, as Afghanistan and Iraq saw the worse with its invasion, these countries will face the worst with the US’s withdrawal.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, War on Terror, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

8. Iran’s Authoritarian Playbook: The Tactics, Doctrine, and Objectives behind Iran’s Influence Operations

Author:
Ariane Tabatabai
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
According to a 2013 indictment by the U.S. Department of Justice, hackers backed by a foreign power gained access to the controls of the Bowman Avenue Dam, a small dam in the New York City suburb of Rye, New York. Cyberattacks on infrastructure have long been a concern in the United States: Russia has targeted the U.S. power grid and other critical infrastructure in the past—at times successfully.1 Hackers backed by the People’s Republic of China have targeted U.S. utilities companies.2 However, neither of these strategic adversaries was behind this bold foray into U.S. suburbia: the culprit, according to the indictment, was the Islamic Republic of Iran.3 Over the past decade, Iran has emerged as an important national security challenge for the United States. A novel part of the regime’s effort—facilitated by the advent of the information age and new technology—is its development of a playbook and toolkit designed to undermine the United States at home just as, in the eyes of Tehran, Washington does in Iran. This makes the current Iranian challenge more subtle and nuanced than has been the case for most of the Islamic Republic’s existence. Iran has gradually expanded its capabilities to compete against the United States for influence within the region, and it is now also taking this competition into the United States and even Europe. One hundred days before the 2020 U.S. elections, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence put a fine point on this threat when National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director William Evanina released a statement noting that, “at this time, we’re primarily concerned with China, Russia and Iran,” who are all looking to “use influence measures in social and traditional media in an effort to sway U.S. voters’ preferences and perspectives, to shift U.S. policies, to increase discord and to undermine confidence in our democratic process.”4 The statement characterized the Iranian threat as follows: “Iran seeks to undermine U.S. democratic institutions and divide the country in advance of the elections. Iran’s efforts center around online influence, such as spreading disinformation on social media and recirculating anti-U.S. content.”5 The Islamic Republic’s authoritarian toolkit is unlikely to become as sophisticated as that of China or Russia in the near-term. After all, Iran’s economy is in shambles, its capacity restrained, and the model of society and governance it tries to offer profoundly limited in its appeal. And even the flagship tool used by Iran to interfere in democracies, namely its online influence operations, continues to suffer from such basic shortcomings as misspelled names, the repeated use of the same tactics and techniques, and a lack of proper research into the target and familiarity with its behavior.6 However, a perceived existential threat posed by the United States, an inability to match the conventional capabilities of the United States and its allies, and a strong desire to compete with the same, have encouraged Iran to double down on efforts to develop a set of asymmetric tools allowing it to overcome its shortcomings. In this sense, Iran is not dissimilar to Russia. “Authoritarian learning” (including partnerships with both Beijing and Moscow) has likely helped Tehran to overcome challenges and to develop its toolkit quickly and effectively. The result is that Iran is becoming a significant authoritarian actor challenging democracy in the United States and Europe. Tehran’s influence operations span traditional and digital media. The regime has built a sprawling web of traditional media outlets, as well as networks of accounts on all major social media platforms (even as it bans and limits access to these websites at home), allowing it to reach millions of users abroad. The content Iran creates, distributes, and amplifies is multilingual and seeks to adapt to democracies’ social, cultural, and political contexts—with fairly mixed results. Among the objectives of Iran’s information manipulation efforts are sowing tensions in democracies, dividing democratic nations internally and from each other, and alleging hypocrisy in democratic states’ foreign policies, undermining democratization in Iran and elsewhere. Iranian hackers routinely target U.S. persons, academic institutions, companies, non-profit organizations, and government agencies and departments. And Iran’s illicit finance schemes are considerable; although, they are currently focused on sanctions evasion and support of information operations, rather than used as a standalone vector to undermine democracies. Some of these tools and the tactics used by Iran are similar to those employed by both Russia and China—and both Beijing and Moscow have lent Tehran a hand in developing some of its capabilities,7 particularly in the realm of information manipulation. Iranian, Russian, and Chinese state media and associated social media accounts echo and amplify each other’s messaging. But there are also some differences in how Tehran deploys these tactics. This is in part due to differences in the political culture and structure of the country, the Islamic Republic’s own ideology and worldview, and the country’s status in the international system. Another significant set of differences arises from Iran’s shortcomings vis-à-vis both its adversaries (including the United States) and its authoritarian partners in Russia and China. For example, Russia and China can leverage their vast nuclear arsenal and enormous economic weight, respectively, to compete directly with the United States. Iran is ill-equipped to compete with the United States in either of those domains and, as such, sees this set of tools and efforts to undermine democracy as a means to elevate its level of competition rather than an end in itself. Hence, Tehran’s toolkit is more limited than those of Beijing or Moscow, leading the Islamic Republic to be more deliberate and selective in the programs it develops and, perhaps, more forceful in how it deploys them. As a result, though Iran’s growing efforts to undermine democracy should not be ignored and should be addressed adequately, for now, the Islamic Republic remains a lesser threat than China and Russia. This report tries to make sense of these activities and provide a framework for understanding Iran’s intentions and capabilities. It provides one of the first comprehensive discussions of Iran’s authoritarian toolkit, doctrine, and objectives. It must be noted that unlike other key Iranian initiatives—such as its nuclear program, missile activities, support for non-state actors, and regional interventions—Iran’s authoritarian toolkit remains scarcely studied in the academic literature. Understanding Tehran’s objectives in undermining democracy and the means it leverages to do so is important for a few reasons. First, Iranian activities over the past few years have shown that the regime is increasingly active in this space. And as Iran’s objectives and the tools it employs are different from those of other key malign actors, understanding their strengths and weaknesses and developing specific responses to them is a worthy exercise. Second, authoritarians learn from each other, and observing the Iranian case allows us to better identify the trends and comprehend the ways in which less powerful malign actors (as opposed to Russia and China, for example) may engage in similar activities designed to undermine democracy.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Elections, Cybersecurity, Foreign Interference, Cyberspace, and Influence
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, and Global Focus

9. Russia hampering Israel-Arab ties

Author:
Micky Aharonson
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Outwardly, Russia is loyal to the idea that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the reason for Middle East unrest. This approach raises the bar on Palestinian demands and makes normal life in the region less likely.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

10. A Stronger Mediterranean Partnership: Why More Than Gas is at Stake

Author:
Eran Lerman
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Israel, Egypt, Greece and Cyprus must encourage the US to assert a higher military and diplomatic profile as a counterweight to Turkish pressures, Russian and Iranian ambitions, and Chinese inroads.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Energy Policy, Military Strategy, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Asia, North America, Egypt, Cyprus, and United States of America