scholarly journals From the Editor

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-156
Author(s):  
Richard C. Martin
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Religious Life ◽  
Election Campaign ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
President Elect ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Growing Population ◽  
Trump Administration

This issue of RoMES has been edited in a national atmosphere of anti-Muslim rhetoric, openly expressed by several candidates during the presidential primaries. Now the election campaign has moved to the appointment, by President-Elect, Donald J. Trump, of cabinet members and close advisors, many of whom share his views of the Middle East and its diverse population. And it does not look good for Muslims in America, including Muslims who are U.S. citizens. Along with Hispanics, African Americans, and Jews, Muslims—and indeed the Middle East as such—are regarded as problems that President-Elect Trump seems intent on doing something about. It is a view of Islam and the Middle East shared increasingly in word and deed by a sizeable and vocal portion of the electorate. What are we to make of the possibility of foreign and domestic policy being crafted by the likes of John R. Bolton, who associates Islam with jihadism and is an admirer of the Islamophobic writings of Robert Spencer? Will there be any tolerance in the new Trump administration of debate and the free exchange of ideas on the need for education about and understanding of the Middle East? The importance of this question relates to the growing population of naturalized and second generation citizens of Middle Eastern origins now living in the U.S. The Middle East is here, and contributing to American culture, religious life, economy, and citizenship.

Introduction: Improving the sustainability of dryland farming systems in the Middle East

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 98-99
Author(s):  
James F. Parr ◽  
Robert I. Papendick
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Sustainable Agriculture ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Farming Systems ◽  
Dryland Farming ◽  
The U.S

Six papers in this issue were presented by Middle Eastern authors at the U.S.-Middle East Conference and Workshop on "Dryland Farming Systems and Technologies for a More Sustainable Agriculture," held at Moscow, Idaho on October 18–23, 1993.

Britain, the Transatlantic Alliance, and the Arab-Israeli War of 1973

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geraint Hughes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
The United States ◽  
Institutional Factors ◽  
Special Relationship ◽  
British Policy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

This article analyzes the impact on transatlantic relations of the October 1973 Arab-Israeli war, focusing on the discrepancy between U.S. and British views of Middle Eastern security before and during the conflict. Despite the institutional factors shaping the U.S.-British “special relationship” and the much greater power of the United States compared to Britain, British policy during the 1973 war was sharply at odds with U.S. policy. This article shows that British policy toward the Middle East was shaped not only by economic concerns (namely the importance of Arab oil to the UK economy) but also by the strategic requirement to undermine Soviet influence in the region and strengthen ties between the Western powers and the Arab states.

Europe-US divergence on Middle East could be long-term

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
International Attention ◽  
Defence Cooperation ◽  
Swift System ◽  
Uk Foreign Policy ◽  
Trump Administration

Subject European and Middle East priorities in the Middle East. Significance The US killing of Iran’s Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani on January 3 focused international attention on continuing tensions between Tehran and Washington and revealed deep and ongoing fractures in the transatlantic alliance. These strains were not caused by Soleimani's death; they stem from fundamental strategic differences on Middle Eastern policy priorities between the transactional Trump administration and a multilaterally oriented Europe. Impacts Trump’s re-election could further divide European from US interests in the Middle East. Europe’s main focus in the Middle East will continue to be security and controlling migration, with less concern for human rights. Future EU-UK foreign policy unity will hinge on safeguarding security and defence cooperation post-Brexit. European efforts to reduce dependence on the dollar as a reserve currency, such as creating an independent SWIFT system, will gain support.

Kefaya and the New Politics of Anti-Americanism

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manar Shorbagy
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
The United States ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Alternative Mode ◽  
American Imperialism ◽  
New Politics ◽  
Transformative Potential ◽  
The World ◽  
The U.S

This essay examines the Kefaya movement in Egypt and what the author calls the new politics of anti-Americanism in Egypt. The essay provides some needed historical background to the era of George W. Bush’s politics and the U.S. hopes for an “Arab Spring.” The essay argues that there has long been a policy in Washington, D.C., toward the Middle East that is a vision and not just a policy, and that it preceded regime change in Iraq. The author argues, moreover, that the U.S. has long sought a Middle East devoid of any resistance to the United States and Israel, that the U.S. has colossally failed in the Middle East, and that this demonstrates the perils of ignoring the complex realities of that area of the world. This essay (drawing on open-ended interviews, statements, newspaper articles, reports, and unpublished documents) presents the Kefaya movement as an example of a Middle Eastern movement with transformative potential, at once a cross-ideological force and an alternative mode of resistance to American imperialism.

CONTEXTS, CONCEPTS AND CONTENTIONS: GENDER LEGISLATION AS POLITICS IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Hawwa ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mounira Charrad
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Gender Issues ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Political Matter

AbstractDebates over gender relevant legislation such as family law have led to serious conflict in many periods of Middle Eastern history, especially in recent times. One way to understand the intensity of the current debates is to recognize that gender issues raise fundamental questions about the relationship between individual and society and the role of states. In this article I argue that, in considering gender relevant legislation in the Middle East, we need to develop a framework that is different from the paradigms anchored in the politics of western liberal democracies in the U.S. and Western Europe. The frame of reference I propose is built upon the following propositions. (1) We should treat gender legislation in the Middle East as an inherently political matter that goes to the heart of the organization of power. Such a perspective opens up the possibility of considering the role of multiple and complex political processes including pressures from below by social movements and top down reforms. (2) We need to reformulate the concepts of tradition and modernity that have pervaded the study of gender in the Islamic world. Tradition and modernity as two distinct, well-defined cultural forms should be dropped altogether. Instead, the discourses of tradition and modernity should be taken as political constructs and the following question should be asked: who benefits from each discourse in given political contexts? (3) The role of kin-based solidarities should be considered in the nexus of conflicts and alliances that shape the process of state formation. The individualistic model of politics in western liberal democracies has limited value for the understanding of political processes in the historical development of the Middle East. The focus should be instead on the role of identities based in communities that define themselves in collective and ascriptive terms of common kinship.

16. The United States in the Middle East

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Hudson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
The United States ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Past Century ◽  
New Developments ◽  
The World ◽  
Islamic Republic Of Iran ◽  
The U.S

This chapter examines the roots of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. It begins with an overview of the origins and development of the United States’s involvement in the region over the past century, focusing on the traditional American interests. It then considers the structure of Middle Eastern policymaking and its domestic political context, as well as Washington’s response to new regional tensions and upheavals since the late 1970s. It also discusses new developments in the region, including the rise of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the U.S.-led interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Palestinian–Israeli impasse. The evolution of U.S. policy since 2000 in the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama is explored as well. The chapter concludes with an analysis of an ‘Obama doctrine’ and ‘American decline’ in the Middle East and the world.

And Now What? The Trump Administration and the Question of Jerusalem

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rashid I. Khalidi
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Middle East ◽  
International Environment ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Just Peace ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration

U.S. policy on the Middle East, in general, and on Palestine, in particular, witnessed a seismic shift in the closing days of 2017: the U.S. president announced his decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and to move the U.S. embassy there. While it came as a shock, the announcement was not a complete surprise: in fact, this essay argues, the decision is in line with a long history of bias in Israel's favor, and constitutes the abandonment of the earlier U.S. pretense of impartiality. The Jerusalem decision is part of what has been termed an “outside-in” approach to the conflict, whereby U.S. client states in the region gradually normalize relations with Israel and accept standard Israeli positions, while simultaneously pressuring the Palestinians to make further concessions to Israel. Taking into account the new international environment, and the equally deep shifts in U.S. public opinion, this commentary also explores the possible formulation of a new strategy to advance Palestinian aspirations for liberation and a just peace.

On The Margins of Middle Eastern Studies: Situating Said’s Orientalism

2009 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-24
Author(s):  
Ella Shohat
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Middle Eastern Studies ◽  
The U.S

The question of beginnings in relation to Edward Said’s book Orientalism can be narrated in very diverse ways, leading to a potentially productive question: when and where does the critique of Orientalism begin? Here at MESA, on the occasion of the 30th anniversary to Said’s book, it would perhaps be instructive to situate the book in relation to the various geographies, histories and fields of knowledge in which it is embedded. What are the contexts and intertexts of Said’s work? How can we characterize its undergirding conceptual paradigms and disciplinary methodologies? What about the neighboring fields that have impacted Said’s work and that in turn have been impacted by that work—are they relevant to Middle Eastern studies? Since the Saidian critique of Orientalist epistemology has by now been extrapolated to diverse cultural geographies, how can we map these transnational currents in relation to the study of the Middle East? And, finally, what does a book, written by a diasporic Palestinian in the U.S., tell us about the kinds of analytical frames that might illuminate the study of that Middle East which is not simply “over there” but also “back here?”

HIGH VISIBILITY, LOW PROFILE: THE SHIʿA IN OMAN UNDER SULTAN QABOOS

2010 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Valeri
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Low Profile ◽  
Arab States ◽  
The Military ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Invasion Of Iraq

If the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 has produced unprecedented consequences for the internal policies of Middle Eastern regimes, this is not related to the upsurge of democratization that was supposed to spread like a contagion through the neighboring countries. Rather, it is due to the increased impact of the Shiʿi issue on the national political agendas of many Arab states. Following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, many observers thus drew attention to the emergence of what they regarded as a Shiʿi “revival” in the Middle East—a perception that the military success of the Lebanese Hizbullah against Israel in the summer of 2006 seemed to confirm.

scholarly journals STRATEGIC UNCERTAINTY: A NEW WAY OF U.S. DIPLOMACY TOWARDS THE QATAR CRISIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Wirautomo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
Arab Countries ◽  
The State ◽  
Strategic Uncertainty ◽  
White House ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Trump Administration ◽  
Gulf Arab

The way of U.S. diplomacy under President Trump administration declared a different approach from the Obama era. As President Trump extols unpredictability as a virtue, where Trump is more active through social media in conveying his views. That behavior considered a boomerang for U.S. diplomacy. Under President Trump’s administration, many of the state statement is contradicted with the White House. The uncertainty of U.S. diplomacy is seen when the United States involved in efforts to resolve the Qatar crisis. Qatar crisis is a diplomatic crisis that occurred between Qatar and the Gulf Arab countries which reached its peak in 2017. The United States has never interfered disputes between Qatar and the Gulf Arab countries that have occurred since 2002. However, the United States increased the tension of the Qatar crisis after several tweets from President Trump criticize Qatar funds terrorism in the Middle East. Simultaneously, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson corrected President Trump's statement by expressing the U.S. is supporting Qatar and trying to help by resolving the conflict as quickly as possible. Qatar is well known as the closest ally of the United States on combating terrorism in the Middle East. The disputes between Qatar and the Gulf Arab countries considered had an impact to be interrupting the movement of the United States on combating terrorism in the Middle East which directly affects several U.S. interests in the region. Differences between President Trump and the State Department do not send a clear nor unified message that is a problem for U.S. strategy towards the Qatar Crisis. It considered as proof of the uncertainty of U.S. diplomacy under President Trump administration. Through this analysis the article seeing the uncertainty of the U.S. diplomacy strategy in resolving the Qatar crisis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document