Geopolitical challenges to the success of democracy in North Africa: Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco (original) (raw)

Democracy Promotion and U.S National Interests in the Middle East

Approximately 10 years ago, a fierce war had taken place in Iraq, a war waged by U.S.A to promote democracy in the country. However, the motivations of the war became ambiguous after the capture and execution of Saddam Hussein, who has been considered as the tyrant of the country.

The Globalization of Democracy and the Location of the Middle East in the Contemporary Global Order

The Middle East and Globalization: Encounters and Horizons, 2012

Globalization is notoriously difficult to define, subsuming a staggeringly complex interrelation of social, economic, and political phenomena, which monodisciplinary approaches alone cannot begin to capture (see also Stetter in this volume). Common to most, if not all, these approaches to "globalization" are three ideas: first, that contemporary globalization bears the imprint of a particular historical trajectory inextricable from the "West's" recent past and present; second, that contemporary globalization involves an accelerated spatiotemporal compression (Scholte; Virilio) driven by the expansion of capitalism (Wallerstein; Frank), often resulting in a complex interrelation of denationalization (Sassen), renationalization, expansion, and resistance; and third, that the diverse phenomena subsumed under this label are crucial if we are to understand the configuration of relations of power in the contemporary global order.

Global Dilemmas of Security and Development in the Middle East

Global Dilemmas of Security and Development in the Middle East, 2013

The book is divided into three thematic parts: international security and policy of world’s super powers towards the MENA region; issues of democracy and civic society and dimensions of social and economic growth. They cannot, of course, be seen as a comprehensive studies but rather serve as inspiration for further academic inquiry. It can be of interest to students or to anyone interested in the MENA region. Part one comprises of articles devoted to policies of the U.S. and Russian towards MENA region, as well as issues vital to international security as Pakistan-Iran relations or foreign policy of Turkey, which had by 2010 emerged as a local super power. It also analyzes American-Qatar relations as well as the influence of Washington’s foreign policy on the stabilization of Egyptian autocracy. Part one includes additionally the issue as relevant to maintaining international equilibrium as migration of Christian caused by military conflict in Iraq, which after the Arab Spring became a regional problem. Part two is devoted to issues of democratization and development of civil society, related to deficit of democracy. It includes articles dedicated to an analysis of Kingdom of Jordan’s political system, which has successfully incorporated elements of political pluralism into traditionally undemocratic rule of Hashemite dynasty, and well as perspective of democratization in Egypt, the most populous country of the region, to which the Arab Spring in 2011 and 2012 brought a difficult transition. Problems of civil society were also addressed in context of non-Arab countries of MENA region – Iran and Turkey. The last part is dedicated to the complex subject of socio-economic growth of the MENA region. Articles touch upon issues as current as relevant problems as changes in ownership structure in relation to Arab online media outlets and changes in patterns of youth behavior. Both chapters are particularly valuable because they adopt a comparative approach towards the subject. The last article of the book, a text on dilemma of Egypt’s economic growth, which for years progressed on the expense of large part of society and contributed to the explosion of public discontents, sheds light on the process characteristic not only for the country itself. The book would not have been possible without the generous support shown throughout the whole process of organization of this conference of Professor Andrzej Mania (Vice-Rector of the Jagiellonian University), Professor Bogdan Szlachta and Professor Andrzej Dudek (Deans of Faculty of International and Political Studies of the Jagiellonian University), Professor Adam W. Jelonek, Professor Leszek Korporowicz, Professor Krzysztof Kościelniak, Professor Jerzy Zdanowski, Dr Łukasz Fyderek, Dr Hayssam Obeidat, Dr Ewa Trojnar, Dr Joanna Wardęga and Agnieszka Mielczarska (Faculty of the Institute of the Middle and Far East of the Jagiellonian University), Professor Maria Kapiszewska (Vice-Rector of the Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University), Professor Hieronim Kubiak, Professor Tadeusz Paleczny, Professor Adam Bieniek, Professor Soli Sahvar and Dr Ido Zelkovitz from the University of Haifa, students and PhD students of the Institute of the Middle and Far East and the Institute of Political Science and International Relations of the Jagiellonian University, Wojciech Wiśniewski and the Academic Circle of Students of International Relations JU (KSSM UJ), Gabriela Hurkot, Jan Kirschenbaum, Katarzyna Gorgoń, Michał Moroz and Ewa Pacułt for support during the whole editorial process. At the end I must also record my deepest gratitude for Karolina Rak and Michał Lipa, friends of many years, excellent editors and the best conference coordinators. Without them and the authors of all articles preparing this publication would not have been realized.

Boots On or Off the Ground: Some considerations about intervention in the Middle East

For the past two decades, the US and the West generally have lacked any clear strategy for the Middle East. The prevailing approach has been informed primarily by the realist approach to international relations, which sees sovereign states as the primary actors, and that the world rests in perpetual anarchy, with unresolvable conflicts and shifting alliances. I argue in this paper that this approach is flawed, and that the conflict occurring is partly a reflection of the limitations of such an approach. Realism is simply an inadequate perspective for dealing with failed states, in the sense that failure comes in good part from internal causes, not interstate relations. This oversight has led to the current lack of coherence and vision by the West in regard to intervention decisions. The lack of a guiding framework and the consequential fallout have led to US President Barack Obama’s Administration largely taking a cautious withdrawal from intervention. Yet, pulling out of the region is unrealistic and unwise. Obama’s general movement towards engaging local partners where possible is sound, but that principle alone is insufficient to make the intervention helpful in moving the region towards a peaceful and developing state. Not only have Western approaches been haphazard and ad hoc, but the level of commitment to the region seems to be waning. What we lack is a vision for how the underlying conflicts can be resolved. The approach put forward in my book, Three Perspectives on Human Irrationality, offers a window to a different way to think about such issues by considering status games, emotions and tribalism. This paper proposes several pillars that start to construct a long-term strategy derived from this approach. The first is to invest in area expertise and local engagement on a large scale. The second is to consistently promote democracy and human rights as part of a strategy to separate religion from politics. The third is to develop third-party monitoring of oil revenue expenditures and flows to push for effective local development. The fourth and final suggestion is to be willing to redraw borders where necessary to recognize differences in ethnicity, as anathematic as that might be for realists.

EN-Regional Power or Global Power in the Mid-East.pdf1.pdf

0003, 2019

With the Presidential Government System, Republic of Turkey started an initiative to develop a respectful sound of the silent and building a forward-thinking civilization, a movement that its radius reaching to Turkey; also presented the final phase of the metamorphosis of its governance structure (or, one of the milestones of the successful phases) both geopolitically and strategically well-settled and conceived. Republic of Turkey, as known, a democratic, secular, and a state with social-programs for underprivileged, wholly governed by rule of law, and when it comes to the several factors that makes Republic of Turkey an irrevocable main player; most of these factors are related to how Republic of Turkey handles regional security and cares for the benefit of society on a macro level in its region; the underlying principles of being a righteous and fair mediator and peace-maker for its peripheral area and for the further connection of those countries in that same peripheral area—as known, most major water sources and rivers stem out of Turkish territory, in relation to these positives are rooted in from strengths of Republic of Turkey out of how well Republic of Turkey conducts its sources of water and security of sources of water; meanwhile as energy travels inter-borders, sources of energy and security of its sources of energy, in a sustainable, stable and if encountered a problem immediately answered manner. In order to protect the fragile balances, the World and the regional peace need smart but not cheating players. Finally, it is an inevitable requirement that State of Israel has to produce itself a new type of governance that will democratically collect certain will and political power such as in the Presidential Government System to solve issues put forward by the current agenda of the region, it is an occurrence we see today that Republic of Turkey and State of Israel must cooperate with each other as a requirement, not a choice.