The latest rapprochement between Cairo and Moscow can be categorized as tactical rather than strategic; designed to pressure an old ally and enhance the legitimacy of the current regime. Friends like the US are necessary for a regime that appears to be preparing for a massive repressive campaign.
The Iron Wall of Jabotinsky has to be torn down, and it can only be torn down through long term civil and ideological struggles against this heritage of Zionism, with the Palestinians living inside the green line playing a crucial part.
Every time the Gulf States’ rulers justify their support for violent rebels in Syria or the military regime in Egypt by appealing to the unalienable right of peoples to basic rights and representative governance, they legitimize the Arab Spring in the eyes of their own peoples, too.
Obama’s overture to Rouhani is costing the United States the goodwill of some old pro-Washington friends in the Arab world. When Prince Bandar, a close friend of the United States and a trusted adviser to the Saudi King, issues threats, Washington must listen.
Cairo’s new rulers have few plausible solutions to the longstanding problems of political economy and while Egyptian civil society failed to democratise the political order in the wake of the Mubarak overthrow, it remains a potentially revolutionary force.
Those who would help from the outside must rely on dialogue, contact and diplomacy, which means Russia, Iran and Assad himself all being involved, like it or not.
A US-Iranian rapprochement over Iran's nuclear programme could improve general US-Iranian relations, leading to the lifting of Iran's painful sanctions. Could this in turn encourage improved relations between the countries of the GCC and Iran?
Foreign military intervention would prolong the war and increase the carnage still further. But this does not mean that the US in conjunction with others, including Syrian civil society, cannot do anything to help the situation. Reply to Nader Hashemi.
This is a reply to Stephen Zunes' response to the author. Zunes argues that violent or nonviolent movements alike must be determined by the strategies and tactics that maximize their chances of success. The author counters that Zunes is ignoring what most Syrian citizens want from the internationa
The Assad killing machine, which was overwhelmingly nonchemical to begin with, can continue unfettered on its rampage. The killing fields of Syria – no end in sight.
Turkey needs to develop a sustainable Syria strategy if it wants to deter any internal and external threats and be influential in Syria's future.
In the face of disinformation, both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood need to redeem the 'Islamist' brand as a whole and re-establish the distinction between a radical and moderate Islamist.
