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.
Expectations for diplomacy with Iran have gotten out of hand in some quarters, abetting political polarization over this issue which has increased the possibility that a final accord with Iran will not come about or succeed.
The Lebanese parliament has failed to find a successor to outgoing Lebanese President Michel Suleiman. This can only result in further political and social polarization.
Across the Arab world, states are emerging scarred by conflicts and revolutions. These states are often in dire need of national reconciliation efforts.
Thousands have flooded the voting booths for the Syrian presidential elections in places like Lebanon and Jordan.