Amman is increasingly pursuing a policy of supporting neither the regime nor the opposition in Syria while quietly working to help resolve the conflict. It has few other options.
Lebanon struggles with a complex web of problems associated with the Syrian conflict, from an influx of refugees to sharp domestic political divisions.
Gulf states’ reasons for intervention in Syria are complex, and their policies are unpredictable and frequently contradictory.
Egypt is at a perilous juncture in a decades-long journey of change. Washington should focus on supporting the Egyptian people more than whoever is currently in power.
On June 3, the Syrian people cast their votes for a new president amidst an ongoing civil war. How will the election results impact the prospects for a political solution?
If Sisi manages to rebuild the Egyptian state, its citizens will be coping with—and debating—his project for many years to come.
As the United States responds to the ascension of Sisi to the presidency, Washington should limit security cooperation to only the most critical issues, restructure U.S. assistance away from the Egyptian military and toward the people, and adopt public and private U.S. positions in favor of real democracy and prosperity for all Egyptians.
The Syrian presidential election is not free or fair. It is Bashar al-Assad’s attempt to legitimize his presidency.
A key objective for Bashar al-Assad in his third presidential term is presenting his crackdown on Syrian opposition groups as a fight against jihadism. In doing so, Assad is betting on the eventual support of the international community in this new “war on terror,” which would secure his position in power.
Just three years ago, it appeared that dictatorships in the Middle East might become replaced by democracies. Now, these same regimes have found ways to use the electoral process to maintain power or attain it.