Center for Gulf Studies

Europe's attempts to forge a strategic partnership with the Arab world have been mismanaged and under-resourced, says Abdullah Baabood. He suggests that the 65year old 22-nation League of Arab States offers a viable framework for future cooperation

The recent nuclear agreement reached on April 2nd 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 in Vienna—the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA)—is an historic long-term comprehensive nuclear deal that aims to verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and ensure that Iran’s future nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. This landmark agreement is consequential not only for the international community, global security and nuclear proliferation but also for Iran and the broader Middle East.
The agreement is very specific and it intends to ensure that Iran “under no circumstances will ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons”. However, it does not address Iran’s regional foreign policy, which has caused anxiety and mistrust with its neighbors as well as the international community at large. Iran’s Middle East policy has been viewed as being detrimental to regional security and stability. Iran’s rhetorical threat of destroying Israel and its perceived and actual blatant intervention in Arab politics spreading from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon as well as Bahrain and Yemen have created animosity and raised unnecessary regional, ethnic and sectarian tensions and conflicts. Despite being isolated and under strict international sanctions, Iran has been able to meddle and interfere in Arab politics and there is a fear that Iran's interference will increase due to the lifting of sanctions.

Arab countries have cautiously welcomed the nuclear deal but remain skeptical about Iran plans and intentions. The regional fear extends far beyond Iran’s nuclear ambitions—despite its significance—as it stems from Iran’s perceived, rhetorical and actual foreign policy orientation. Therefore, the nuclear agreement, which aims to bring Iran back to the international community, alone is not necessarily going to alleviate these fears anytime soon nor is it going to help alleviate the perception and misperception about Iran's role in the region and consequently Gulf Security.
In fact, and the contrary to the expectations, the agreement has led to further heightening of regional fears as it is viewed that it grants Iran immediate political status, financial resources and future economic ability, while compliance with its terms will only become apparent over time, allowing it time, space and resources to continue with its existing policy leading to further insecurity and conflict.

This paper will discuss the security challenges and especially the implication of the Iran Nuclear Deal and explain how the deal, combined with other the dynamic shifts in the regional and international settings, have, counter intuitively, led to further deterioration in the security environment of the region.

The recent nuclear agreement reached on April 2nd 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 in Vienna—the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA)—is an historic long-term comprehensive nuclear deal that aims to verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and ensure that Iran’s future nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. This landmark agreement is consequential not only for the international community, global security and nuclear proliferation but also for Iran and the broader Middle East.
The agreement is very specific and it intends to ensure that Iran “under no circumstances will ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons”. However, it does not address Iran’s regional foreign policy, which has caused anxiety and mistrust with its neighbors as well as the international community at large. Iran’s Middle East policy has been viewed as being detrimental to regional security and stability. Iran’s rhetorical threat of destroying Israel and its perceived and actual blatant intervention in Arab politics spreading from Iraq, Syria, Lebanon as well as Bahrain and Yemen have created animosity and raised unnecessary regional, ethnic and sectarian tensions and conflicts. Despite being isolated and under strict international sanctions, Iran has been able to meddle and interfere in Arab politics and there is a fear that Iran's interference will increase due to the lifting of sanctions.

Arab countries have cautiously welcomed the nuclear deal but remain skeptical about Iran plans and intentions. The regional fear extends far beyond Iran’s nuclear ambitions—despite its significance—as it stems from Iran’s perceived, rhetorical and actual foreign policy orientation. Therefore, the nuclear agreement, which aims to bring Iran back to the international community, alone is not necessarily going to alleviate these fears anytime soon nor is it going to help alleviate the perception and misperception about Iran's role in the region and consequently Gulf Security.
In fact, and the contrary to the expectations, the agreement has led to further heightening of regional fears as it is viewed that it grants Iran immediate political status, financial resources and future economic ability, while compliance with its terms will only become apparent over time, allowing it time, space and resources to continue with its existing policy leading to further insecurity and conflict.

This paper will discuss the security challenges and especially the implication of the Iran Nuclear Deal and explain how the deal, combined with other the dynamic shifts in the regional and international settings, have, counter intuitively, led to further deterioration in the security environment of the region.

As a small, vulnerable country situated in the turmoil of the Middle East, Qatar faces several challenges. Chief amongst these are the existential geopolitical threat posed by large neighbouring countries and the domino effect of regional instability, the rise of radicalisation and the spread of global terrorism. Despite its impressive economic performance, Qatar faces economic difficulties given its vulnerability to oil price drops. Other challenges include the sustainability of the social contract and food security. Qatar is also confronted with a number of social challenges emanating from the pace and content of its transformation from a traditional society to a modern state, with all that may entail in terms of changing societal and cultural norms. Last but not least, the small size of Qatar's traditional and conservative population, in contrast to the large number of immigrants, is causing social and cultural frictions. Notwithstanding the multiplicity of challenges and threats and the recent blockade against it by its neighbours, however, Qatar has developed its own modes of state and societal resilience.

This paper explores the shared soft-security implications of civil war and a political instability in the region. Focus is granted to how these conflicts share similar consequences including refugee crises, rising terrorist sentiment, and finally Sunni-Shiite tensions. Moreover, the analysis examines how these issues affect both neighboring countries in the Middle East, and international players in the region.

Executive Summary Middle Eastern nation states came into existence not as a result of naturally-evolving and unique historical, social, or political processes reaching a nexus of cohesion, but rather, they emerged as a manifestation of the fragility of colonial power in the region. This study provides an analysis of fragile states through two case studies: Lebanon and Palestine.

This paper discusses the background to the Palestinian elections and highlights the fact that they are the first democratic elections since 1996. It discusses the reasons for Hamas's participation and the problems it faced. It also examines what issues the electoral candidates needed to touch on in order to win the election. The paper highlights the fact that Fatah's days are over because of widespread corruption. It touches on how Hamas now needs to deal with the international community and how it can compromise with Israel. The paper emphasises that Hamas is the people's choice and that, because it has many obstacles ahead of it, the international community needs to allow it time and to monitor its progress, watching how it deals with being in the real political realm.

Since the 1990s, a number of pressures have contributed to the need for political reform in the Gulf. These pressures have been domestic, (i.e. demographic changes, collapse of rentierism, civil protests) regional (i.e. Israeli/Palestinian conflict, 1991