Research & Commentary Results

The Nov. 1 seizure by Malta of two 2000-cubic-foot containers full of Libyan currency printed by the Russian state printer, Goznak, that was intended for delivery to Libya’s non-internationally recognized eastern government, highlights the continuing importance of the economic aspects of Libya’s ongoing civil war.

With the fall of the Berlin Wall 30 years ago, ties between Western and Eastern Europe were renewed. In the same period, another wall crumbled — between the Middle East and the former Soviet states. And yet, to this day, U.S. national security institutions continue to view these two regions through a Cold War lens, separating how they are handled. This approach needs to change; integrating research and policy toward the Middle East and the bordering states of the former Soviet Union would improve analytical understanding and help identify new policy options.

On Nov. 4 Daily Sabah, a strongly pro-government English-language daily in Turkey, published a scathing editorial with a title that says it all: “Al Jazeera English: A threat against the Turkey-Qatar alliance.” According to the editorial, Al Jazeera English slandered Turkey over its recent military incursion into northern Syria, and thus jeopardized the future of the Turkey-Qatar alliance. Given the close relationship between the Turkish government and Daily Sabah — and indeed the broader media environment in Turkey — it is highly unlikely that such a fiery editorial, which directly threatens Qatar, would have been published without a green light from “the palace.”

With ongoing protests, potential sectarian clashes, and threats of terrorism in the region looming, the country’s armed forces need propping up now more than ever.

On Oct. 29, Prime Minister Saad Hariri submitted his resignation and that of the government, a move that has been hailed as an important victory for the protestors who have taken to the streets across the country for nearly three weeks now. Heralded as al-thawra, or revolution in Arabic, Lebanon is witnessing the rise of an inclusive, decentralized, and grassroots movement that transcends geography, sect, and traditional loyalties to political dynasties and parties.

Iranian mediation might bring the two big political blocs to an agreement on a new government, but the protest movement demands only new, clean faces and won’t readily accept another cabinet drawn from discredited political blocs.

Now is a time to stand with the people of Lebanon, and to maintain support for the country’s constitutional institutions.

After violent confrontations with the government of Yemen and repeated struggles for autonomy, members of the Southern Transitional Council (STC), which represents a political movement that calls for secession, appeared satisfied with the terms of a deal that will be signed with the government of Yemen in Riyadh on Oct. 31. The Saudi-brokered agreement united the conflicting parties in their fight against the Iran-backed Houthis, with a strong vision aimed at stopping any side-show that could endanger this effort.

Today, on the streets of Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries, we hear the demands of the youth, asking for justice, governance, dignity, and jobs. In contrast to these demands, we see governments unwilling or unable to move towards systems of governance that would ensure transparency, accountability, and fair competition for all. Corruption can only be vanquished if transparency, a rigorous justice system, and credible redress mechanisms are put in place. The World Bank can and must re-engage on that path.

The Trump administration inherited a number of complex problems in the Syrian file from its predecessors in the White House. In dealing with the Syrian crisis, the Obama administration had three main priorities: not disturbing Iran in Syria during the process of nuclear negotiations, working with Russia toward a ceasefire in various parts of Syria (without trusting that Russia could deliver or should have the upper hand), and, most importantly, carrying out a limited military intervention in the northeast to defeat ISIS — an issue it considered separately from the Syrian crisis.

Oct. 26, 2019 marked the 25th anniversary of the signing of the peace treaty between the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the State of Israel. A quarter-century on, relations between the two countries remain mired in disputes and difficulties, and no special celebrations were planned despite the significance of the event. While the challenges facing the two states are complex, both sides benefit from the agreement. The fact that the peace treaty has endured for two and a half decades amid the chaos and unrest afflicting the region is certainly a cause for celebration and gives grounds for optimism.

Only one leader has the moral standing and mass appeal to be able to move Iraq out of the deadly stalemate in which it now finds itself and which may degenerate into more violence and chaos if the status quo is not upended: Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

It remains to be seen how resilient the protest movement is and how long it can remain mobilized for, especially if political leaders refuse to change their stance.

Russia is clear in its policy toward northeastern Syria: The future of the region will be determined through talks between the representatives of the Kurds, who traditionally live in the area, and Damascus.

The FII’s public relations bash is important in that it shows the world that the leadership of the kingdom has an ambitious and real vision to move the country forward.