Resistance to Change

Author(s):  
Necati Polat

Of the apparent stamina of resistance to change, not only in Turkey but also in the Middle East, this chapter argues that treating the draconian regimes in the greater region as mere vestiges of native authoritarianisms lacks insights into the ostensible strength of those regimes. Accordingly, a characteristically ‘modern’ rationality could be implicit in the project of forced emancipation that largely defined the despotisms in the region during the Arab Spring. Motivated by a unique ‘liberation theology’ to save the locals ‘from themselves’, the regimes enforced ‘modernity’ in the face of traditional identities and practices. Promising autonomy from the tutelage of the local, this theology not only manufactured a crucial element of consent in respective domestic societies, but also brought together strands of global thinking, all possibly motivated by a normative commitment to modernity, ultimately in favour of those authoritarianisms: the Turkish neo-nationalism (ulusalcılık), the US neo-conservatism, and Dugin’s Eurasianism.

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-32
Author(s):  
Khalid Hashim Mohammed

The Obama administration repeated that its promise to withdraw from Iraq on time was one of its most important achievements in the first presidential term. In fact, this withdrawal was within a broader and broader context that began to emerge in Obama's second term: withdrawal from the Middle East, In the so-called Asia "Rebalance", but the growing international chaos and the explosion of many crises in the face of the US administration such as the Syrian crisis and Iraq, especially after the so-called Arab Spring revolutions, cast a shadow over the region, and turning Iraq from the success story of the Obama administration and a benchmark for its achievements in foreign policy, a story Failure and a standard of confusion in foreign policy, and critics of the Obama administration, the American withdrawal "arbitrary" created a vacuum in Iraq filled by the opponents of the United States and lose control, or at least affect the course of the arena, both at the level of local players or regional.


2021 ◽  
pp. 002190962110173
Author(s):  
Andrey V Korotayev ◽  
Alina A Khokhlova

In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region after the Arab Spring, monarchy has turned out to be a far stronger negative predictor of destabilization than it was before 2011. For the MENA, the period after 2010 can be subdivided into three periods: a mass protests period (2011–2012), the period of explosive growth of radical Islamist activities (2013–2016), and the second mass protest period (since 2016). Our analysis demonstrates that monarchies’ stabilization capacity was preserved in 2011–2012 and grew substantially during 2013–2016, as MENA monarchies turned out to be more resilient in the face of the outbreak of radical Islamism in the region.


Author(s):  
A. V. Krylov

A huge wave of mass protests for the last years has lead to a collapse of many longstanding traditional regimes in some Arab states (Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen). In other states (Syria, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria and Morocco) a serious aggravation of political situation occurred. Many experts in Russia as well as abroad share an opinion that the phenomenon of the “Arab revolution" or the so cold "Arab Spring" has the same basic pattern: after the beginning of unrest in North Africa and the Middle East the Islamist political parties, organizations and groups are gaining strength, popularity and influence. The main content of the article is focused on the analysis of religious, political, socio-economic and other aspects of the contemporary ideology and practice of the radical Islam, its threats and challenges. The current situation in the region has favored the creation of a new political alliance in the Greater Middle East. Now the US administration's policy in the Middle East is aimed at the advancement of the of the radical Islam front to Iran, North Caucasus region and Central Asia. This policy corresponds to the global strategic interests of the U.S. regional partners including Petro-Islamic States, Turkey and even Israel. Analyzing the situation around Syria the author notes that the steps undertaken by the members of the new regional alliance to eliminate B. Assad - another victim of the "Arab Spring" – can, first of all, aggravate an extremely unstable situation in Syria, and, secondly, create a real perspective of the radical Islam advancement right up to the borders of the Russian Federation.


2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 442-475
Author(s):  
Peter R. Demant ◽  
Ariel Finguerut

The main purpose of this paper is to discuss the paradoxical consequences the so-called “Arab Spring”, from 2011 to 2014/15, which has led in various countries of the Arab world and beyond to different outcomes, but nowhere to stable democracy. We intend to discuss the outcomes of those political mobilizations and revolts, paying special attention to (a) the role of Islamist movements and (b) U.S reactions to the recent Mideast upheavals. We start with a general analysis and go to a few case studies (e.g. Egypt, Syria, and Turkey). In discussing the impact of Islamism, we attempt a classification of currents along two coordinates, one parameter contrasting Sunni and Shiite movements, the other laying out the continuum from pacific-modernist to violent jihadist. We defend that the dynamics of intra-Islamist tensions (such as Sunni jihadist against the Shiite Hizbullah-Syria-Iran axis) are no less crucial than the religious-secularist divide for understanding recent developments. Regarding US policies, we emphasize the dilemmas and contradictions within U.S government. We investigate the hypothesis that the US was caught largely unaware by the Arab Spring, and that its reactions suffered from the amorphousness of prior positions of the Obama administration, combined with leftovers from the Bush period. Internal contradictions of Obama’s Middle East doctrine coupled with a general isolationist trend have precluded the US from assuming more forceful policies, creating frustrations on all sides, and enflaming rather than dousing the fires of anti-Westernism in the Islamic world.Keywords: Arab Spring ; U.S policies ; Syria; jihadist.  Resumo: O principal objetivo deste artigo é discutir as consequências paradoxais da chamada "Primavera Árabe", que a partir de 2011 aos nossos dias produziu em vários países do mundo árabe diferentes resultados, mas em nenhum lugar chegou-se à democracia estável. Temos a intenção de discutir os resultados dessas mobilizações políticas e revoltas, com especial atenção para (a) o papel dos movimentos islâmicos e (b) as reações e posturas dos EUA ante os recentes levantes no Oriente Médio. De uma análise geral partiremos para estudos de caso (como Egito, Síria e Turquia). Ao discutir o impacto do islamismo, tentamos uma classificação das correntes ao longo de duas coordenadas, um deles contrastando movimentos sunitas e xiitas, e outro que define o continuum de pacifista - modernista para jihadista –violento. Postulamos que a dinâmica das tensões intra- islâmicos (como a de jihadistas sunitas contra o eixo Hezbollah -Síria- Irã xiita) não são menos importantes do que a divisão religiosa - secular para compreender os desdobramentos recentes. No que diz respeito aos EUA, destacamos os dilemas e contradições dentro do governo dos EUA. Nós investigamos a hipótese de que os EUA foi pego de surpresa em grande parte pela Primavera Árabe, e que as reações do governo Obama traduzem mais um recolhimento do que um novo engajamento.Palavras-chave: Primavera Árabe; Políticas dos EUA; Síria; jihadismo.   DOI: 10.20424/2237-7743/bjir.v4n3p442-475


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Elfan Kaukab

Spring 2011 was a historic year in the Middle East and was momentum for the rise of people power to overthrow the long-reigning authoritarian regime. This event is known as The Arab Spring. However, on the way, the Arab dream did not come easy. This book tries to capture the opportunities and challenges of democratization in Arab countries after the Arab Spring. There are three countries, namely Tunisia, Egypt, and Syria, which are the focus of this book's study. The interests of the United States (US) emerged as the trigger for democratization efforts. The US does not hesitate to hinder democratization in a country with leaders who are not pro-Western. It is not surprising that democratization in Arab countries is only seen as a US political project to safeguard its national interests. From this book, we can reflect on the situation in Indonesia. Does that also happen?


2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria do Céu de Pinho Ferreira Pinto

When the Arab Spring broke out, the United States was in a quandary over how to handle the crisis in its attempt to balance its moral obligations and ideals without undercutting its strategic interests and those of its close allies. Flaws in US diplomatic approach have contributed to one of the most serious foreign policy crisis for a US administration to date with consequential upheaval and erosion of the US-built balance of power. The reactions and policy responses of the Obama administration highlight the difficulties in grasping with the new reality in the Middle East and in enunciating a policy platform that could combine American interests and values.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 277-284
Author(s):  
Nelson Goldpin Obah-Akpowoghaha ◽  
Momodou Lamin Tarro ◽  
Ogunmilade Adekunle

Studies on the Arab Spring have advanced economic reason as propeller to various ugly events that have changed the face of most states in the Middle East and North Africa. Most of this literature undermined the influenced of external motivations and knowledge which have been instrumental to certain occurrences in developing countries. This piece identified existing stereotypes which have been underscored by western thoughts and advanced an opposing narrative. This narrative seems to gain less attention compare to western views on the issues that surround the Arab quake. However, this investigation relied on secondary sources of data which is mainly extant literature vis-à-vis Marxist theories with the view of de-emphasising certain notions and bring to the fore realities of events in the Middle East and North Africa.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. M. TRUEVTSEV

This article looks at the structure and the dynamics of the Middle  Eastern crisis set in motion by the events of the Arab Spring. At the  heart of the crisis was Syria, where antigovernment protests broke  out in early 2011, almost in parallel with other countries also  affected by the Arab Spring. Starting from late March 2011, the  unrest morphed into a civil war, leading to a large-scale crisis  engulfing the country by the end of the year. At first, the opposition  to the Syrian regime consisted of numerous groups with varying  political affiliations – from liberals to Islamists – however, by early  2012, radical Islamism came to dominate the opposition forces. And  by the end of the same year, the opposition was spearheaded by an  openly terrorist organization – the al-Nusra Front, an outgrowth of the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda. Over the same period, regional  and international forces were becoming more and more involved in the Syrian crisis. Since 2012, in parallel with the Syrian crisis, there  has been another internal conflict raging in the Middle East, namely  in Iraq, with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) taking  the foreground and combining groups of Iraqi al-Qaeda militants  with Baathist underground forces. In 2014–2015, ISIL took hold of  large swaths of territory in Syria and Iraq, effectively turning the  Syrian civil war into a regional conflict. In addition to Syria and Iraq, the ongoing crisis has involved – either directly or indirectly – such actors as Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and a number of  other regional powers. Turkey has been indirectly involved in the  Syrian crisis since its very beginning, but starting from 2016 its  engagement in the conflict has become much more active – not only  in Syria, but also in Iraq. In 2013, Iran started to interfere in the  Syrian crisis directly, using its Shia allies, and expanded its presence onto Iraq in 2014. Saudi Arabia and Qatar’s participation in the  Syrian conflict has been indirect, mainly through military and  financial assistance provided to their clients inside the country. However, Saudi Arabia’s activities in Syria have started to decline in  2015, due to its military involvement in Yemen, which – in a broader  context – can be perceived as a peripheral component of  the large regional conflict. In addition to the above mentioned  components, one could also name a number of other equally important factors to the crisis. One of them is that the ranks of al- Nusra and ISIL militants have been reinforced not only by people  coming from the Arab countries, but also from the citizens of  Western Europe, North America and the former USSR. Another factor  has been the growing role of Kurdish groups in the  confrontation with the terrorists, especially with ISIL. This has led to  the creation of a Kurdish autonomy in northern Syria. At the same  time, an armed confrontation began in Turkish Kurdistan, which  Turkey views as a threat to its territorial integrity. The Syrian crisis has also been marked by involvement of global powers, such as the  US and Russia. The US-led international coalition has not succeeded  in changing the course of the conflict – on the other hand, Russia’s involvement since the second half of 2015 has made a significant  difference. With the end of the campaign against ISIL already in  view, and with the prospects for a successful intra- Syrian  settlement, it would seem reasonable to raise the question of the  post-conflict configuration of the region, which is discussed at the  end of the article.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baran Han ◽  
Pil Soo Choi ◽  
Seo-Young Yun ◽  
Sung Hyun Son ◽  
Jaeeun Park ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document