From Egypt to America, a military enmeshed in politics is bad for stability and democracy.
An arcane dispute between Egypt’s president and Al-Azhar is really about moral leadership in society.
Egypt’s new administrative capital, currently under construction—and tentatively named Wedian, which means “desert valleys”— represents concretely where President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has been trying to take his country during his five years of authoritarian rule.
Egypt’s economy may be improving, but this is neither inclusive nor sustainable.
Washington condemns its Middle Eastern enemies for their abuses, but green lights its friends.
By releasing military aid before Egypt fully meets the United States’ conditions, the Trump administration is inviting the Egyptian government to backslide.
What the U.S. government, and particularly Congress, can do is scrutinize engagement with and assistance to Egypt in order to ensure that they promote stability for the nation rather than one man rule.
A regular survey of experts on matters relating to Middle Eastern and North African politics and security.
In an interview, Jean-Pierre Filiu discusses his recent book on the mechanisms of survival adopted by Arab regimes.
While the Middle East’s central battle line is changing, Egypt is pursuing a strategy of opportunism that aims to maximize its returns and preserve its options.