Number of results to display per page
Search Results
62. Cooperation as a Way out of Turmoil foe the Middle East
- Author:
- Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu
- Publication Date:
- 06-2015
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Institution:
- ARI Movement
- Abstract:
- In discussing the turmoil that has recently engulfed the Middle East, the author considers a parallel with Europe in the 17th century and the beginning of the Westphalian order. The author lays out his vision for the future of the region, which is predicated upon four main parameters: mutual acceptance among all the peoples of the Middle East, embracing the spirit of moderation and modernization, the quest for political stability, and economic cooperation. According to the author, regional dialogue is the first step towards building political consensus and realizing this vision.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation, Political stability, Modernization, and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Middle East
63. The Middle East in Conflict: The Empires Strike Back
- Author:
- Dov S. Zakheim
- Publication Date:
- 06-2015
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Institution:
- ARI Movement
- Abstract:
- In consideration of the general instability in the Middle East – the bloody Syrian civil war and its mounting refugee crisis, the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the emergence of ISIL and ongoing fighting in Iraq, and the war in Yemen – the author argues that the geographical map of the region based on the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement is disintegrating. Furthermore, the author argues that the region’s turmoil has to some extent had a spillover effect on the three non-Arab states – Turkey, Iran, and Israel, which further adds troubles to the region. While Israel is largely an outlier, the author posits that Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia will be embroiled in the “increasingly bitter contest for dominance of the Muslim Middle East.”
- Topic:
- Civil War, Imperialism, Regional Cooperation, and Refugee Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Syria, and Egypt
64. Iranian Public Opinion on the Nuclear Negotiations
- Author:
- Nancy Gallagher, Clay Ramsay, and Ebrahim Mohseni
- Publication Date:
- 06-2015
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
- Abstract:
- View the survey questionnaire and trend tables.This survey is one in a series of surveys related to Iran that CISSM has conducted since 2013. View the complete list of surveys. Summary of Findings 1. Iran’s Nuclear Program Overwhelming majorities of Iranians continue to say that it is very important for Iran to have a nuclear program. The nuclear program is seen as one of Iran’s greatest achievements. A large majority continues to see the program as driven purely by peaceful goals, though one in five see it as being an effort to pursue nuclear weapons. This support for Iran’s nuclear program appears to be driven by a combination of symbolic and economic considerations. However, while a majority sees the program as being an important way for Iran to stand up to the West, serving Iran’s future energy and medical needs is seen as more important. 2. Views on Nuclear Weapons A large and growing majority of Iranians express opposition to nuclear weapons in various ways. Two thirds now say that producing nuclear weapons is contrary to Islam. Eight in ten approve of the NPT goal of eliminating nuclear weapons and establishing a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Consistent with these views, Iranians express opposition to chemical weapons, with nine in ten approving of Iran’s decision, during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, to not use chemical weapons in response to Iraq’s use of them. 3. Iran - P5+1 Nuclear Deal Given information about the nuclear deal being negotiated between Iran and the P5+1, a substantial majority favors it and only one in six oppose it. A quarter, though, are undecided or equivocal. Nearly three in four are optimistic that Iran and the P5+1 will arrive at a deal in regard to Iran’s nuclear program. Three in four think the Majlis (Iran’s Parliament) should have a say on a nuclear deal. 4. The Potential Removal of Sanctions The support for Iran pursuing a deal with the P5+1 appears to rest to some extent on the assumption—held by a large majority—that all sanctions on Iran would be lifted as part of the deal, and there is optimism that the sanctions would in fact be lifted. Approximately half of respondents say Iran should not agree to a deal unless the U.S. lifts all of its sanctions, while nearly as many say Iran should be ready to make a deal even if the U.S. retains some sanctions, provided all UN and EU sanctions are lifted. Among those who believe that all U.S. sanctions would be lifted, support for a deal is nearly two thirds, while among those who assume that the U.S. will retain some sanctions, support is a bare majority. The removal of UN sanctions is seen as more important than the removal of U.S. sanctions. 5. Expectations About Positive Effects of a Deal Iranians express high expectations that a nuclear deal would result in significant positive effects in the near term. Majorities say they would expect to see, within a year, better access to foreign medicines and medical equipment, significantly more foreign investment, and tangible improvement in living standards. 6. The Sanctions and Iran’s Economy The sanctions on Iran are overwhelmingly perceived as having a negative impact on the country’s economy and on the lives of ordinary people. However, views of the economy are fairly sanguine and have been improving. Also, the impact of the sanctions is seen as limited and a lesser factor affecting the economy as compared to domestic mismanagement and corruption. 7. Views of Rouhani As Iran’s parliamentary elections near, Iran’s President Rouhani is clearly one of the strongest political figures in Iran. Half would prefer to see Rouhani supporters win in the February 2016 parliamentary elections, while one quarter favors his critics. However, Rouhani supporters have high expectations that a deal removing all U.S. sanctions and bringing rapid economic change is going to take place. If a deal is reached that does not meet these expectations, Rouhani could be left politically vulnerable. In a hypothetical presidential match-up, Rouhani currently does better than former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by two to one. Large majorities say Rouhani has been at least somewhat successful in improving the economic situation, improving Iran’s relations with European countries, and reducing sanctions. Three in four Iranians say that if the negotiations were to fail to produce a final agreement, they would only or mostly blame the P5+1 countries. 8. Relations with the U.S. Views of the United States, especially the U.S. government, continue to be quite negative. Only four in ten believe that U.S. leaders genuinely believe that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Asked why the U.S. is imposing sanctions on Iran, the most common answers portray the U.S. as seeking to confront and dominate Iran; very few mention concerns about nuclear weapons. However, a slight majority has a positive view of the American people. If Iran and the P5+1 reach a deal, a large majority believes that the U.S. will still impede other countries from cooperating with Iran, and a slight majority believes that Iran making concessions on the nuclear issue will likely lead the U.S. to seek more concessions. Just one in six believe that concessions would be likely to lead to greater accommodation; however, this number is higher than a year ago. Large majorities favor various confidence-building measures between Iran and the U.S., including greater trade, which is more widely supported than a year ago. People-to-people confidence-building measures are especially popular. A majority thinks that it is possible for Islam and the West to find common ground. 9. Views of P5+1 Countries Two thirds say they do not trust the P5+1 countries—however, the minority expressing trust has increased since fall 2014. Views of specific countries vary: large majorities have negative views of the UK and the U.S.; modest majorities have unfavorable views of Russia and France, while views are divided on Germany and China. 10. Views of Regional Actors A very large majority has an unfavorable view of Saudi Arabia—even slightly more negative than views of the U.S. A slight majority now has an unfavorable view of Turkey, which was not the case a year ago. Large majorities continue to view Syria and Iraq favorably.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Middle East, and Saudi Arabia
65. The EU’s Niche in the South Caucasus: Old Partners, New Challenges
- Author:
- Daniel Khachatryan
- Publication Date:
- 01-2015
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
- Abstract:
- Daniel Khachatryan is a Hrant Dink Foundation fellow at the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) within the framework of the Support to the Armenia-Turkey Normalisation Process Programme financed by the European Union. Khachatryan’s academic background includes studies at Yerevan State University, University of Oslo and Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. In this article, Khachatryan dwells upon the possible steps to be taken by the EU towars the South Caucasus in order to define its role in the region by focusing on the recent developments in Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. Daniel Khachatryan, Avrupa Birliği tarafından finanse edilen ve Hrant Dink Vakfı’nın yürütmekte olduğu “Ermenistan-Türkiye Normalleşme Süreci Destek Programı” kapsamında bursiyer olarak TESEV’de çalışmaktadır. Erivan Devlet Üniversitesi, Oslo Üniversitesi ve Tufts Üniversitesi’nde eğitimini tamamlamış olan Khachatryan bu makalesinde Azerbaycan, Ermenistan ve Gürcistan’daki gelişmelere odaklanarak Avrupa Birliği’nin Güney Kafkasya’daki yeri ve rolünü tanımlamak için atması gereken muhtemel adımlara ve mekanizmalara değinmektedir. Makale yalnızca İngilizce olarak yayınlanmıştır.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Territorial Disputes, European Union, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and South Caucasus
66. A Window of Opportunity to Upgrade EU Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Stefan Lehne
- Publication Date:
- 05-2014
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- As the financial crisis recedes and the European Union (EU) regains a measure of internal stability, pressure in Europe\'s neighborhood is on the rise. The Ukraine crisis and turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa have elevated foreign policy to the top of the EU\'s agenda. Whether the EU can make its external action more effective will depend in large part on institutional decisions made in 2014—the selection of a new leadership team and the reorganization of the European Commission.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Economics, Human Rights, and Regional Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, and North Africa
67. The New Triangle of Egypt, Israel, and Hamas
- Author:
- Ehud Yaari
- Publication Date:
- 01-2014
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- With Israeli acquiescence to de facto alterations of the 1979 peace treaty, Egypt has deployed substantial military forces into the Sinai to combat terrorists. But Israel remains hesitant about Cairo's inclination to increase pressure on Hamas in Gaza. Over the past year, Israel and Egypt have used a little-known, legally permissible understanding -- the Agreed Activities Mechanism -- to bypass restrictions on the number and type of Egyptian forces permitted in much of the Sinai. In doing so, they have made de facto modifications to their 1979 peace treaty without resorting to the diplomatically risky procedure of "reviewing" the treaty itself. As a result, considerable Egyptian army forces are now constantly deployed in central and eastern Sinai (Areas B and C of the peninsula, respectively), in a manner and scope never envisaged by the teams that negotiated the treaty more than three decades ago. Going forward, this new reality on the ground is unlikely to be reversed and is bound to have profound consequences for Egyptian-Israeli security cooperation, Cairo's ongoing counterterrorism campaign, and the fate of Hamas in the neighboring Gaza Strip.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation, Terrorism, and Military Strategy
- Political Geography:
- Middle East, Israel, Gaza, Egypt, Sinai Peninsula, and Cairo
68. Quiet Partnerships for a New Era: Emerging Opportunities for Arab-Israeli Cooperation
- Author:
- Alon Paz
- Publication Date:
- 01-2014
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Regional circumstances point to both the possibility and the need for enhanced Arab-Israeli efforts to address challenges in the security, energy, food/water scarcity, and public-health domains.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation and Armed Struggle
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Arabia, Egypt, and Maghreb
69. Return to Babel: The Race to Integration in the Southern Caucasus
- Author:
- Heidemaria Gurer
- Publication Date:
- 03-2014
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Connections
- Institution:
- Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
- Abstract:
- When talking or writing about the (Southern) Caucasus, I usually like to start by illustrating the diversity of its three countries when it comes to their cultural, linguistic, historical, economic and religious composition. This is due to the heavy migration in the region and the century-long influence of surrounding regional powers and to the fact that it is located in a strategic triangle between Iran, Russia and Turkey, with additional geopolitical interest coming from the European Union and the United States. There is a significant background of existing conflicts to take into account. For those who know the region this may seem redundant; however, for “newcomers” it is a good start in describing the (Southern) Caucasian Babel.
- Topic:
- Imperialism, Migration, Regional Cooperation, and Diversity
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Asia, and South Caucasus
70. Politics in Troubled Times: Israel-Turkey Relations
- Author:
- Aybars Görgülü, Mensur Akgün, and Sabiha Senyücel Gündoğar
- Publication Date:
- 12-2014
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
- Abstract:
- Setting out with the premise that the current situation of Israel-Turkey relations is detrimental to all parties in the region, TESEV Foreign Policy Program conducted a series of studies in order to dwell upon alternative areas of cooperation and discuss the current state of relations. To this end, two roundtable meetings were organized: the first one was held on 2 October 2013 in Istanbul and the second was organized in Jerusalem on 22 December 2013. A trip to Israel was organized between 6 and 8 July 2014 to complement these roundtables, during which a significant number of meetings were held with authorities form the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel, as well as journalists and various experts. This report touches upon the historical background of Israel-Turkey relations and the potential areas for Turkish-Israeli cooperation.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, History, Bilateral Relations, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine