By integrating pro-regime armed groups into state structures, the Assad regime has created a hybrid military order.
Efforts to reconstitute and rebuild state security institutions in post-conflict states will require not just technical and organizational fixes, but will hinge upon a range of sweeping steps and reforms with generational scope.
Today Iraq looks like a plurality of competing but fluid centers of power linked to domestic and/or external patrons.
The integration of foreign and informal forces in Syria makes success in restoring pre-2011 unified security sector governance improbable.
The determination that both the LAF and Hezbollah wish to play a larger role shaping Lebanese national security politics suggests that there may not be enough room for two preeminent military institutions in post-war Lebanon.
Defense sectors in several Arab countries have undergone significant transformation leading to the hybridization of security governance, leaving them with forms of sovereignty that are both constrained and constantly contested.
The hybridization of security governance in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen leaves them with forms of sovereignty that are both constrained and constantly contested.
Although stabilization programs were not part of the Syrian political transformation initially envisioned, they did cultivate more inclusive, capable local governance. But with larger military and political factors shaping outcomes on the ground in Syria, what will endure of this?
By closing its representative institution to the Palestinians, the Trump administration has again harmed peace prospects.
The conflicts generating mass population movements from and within the Middle East have become global in nature, and their destabilizing effect can be felt far beyond its borders. Addressing their ramifications requires bold leadership and a sense of shared responsibility at the global, regional, and national levels.