Egypt is a geographically large, populous and internationally-recognised state with an organised bureaucracy and armed forces. In contrast, Hamas is an armed social movement, which, after its electoral victory in January 2006 and, more importantly, after acquiring full control over the Gaza Strip in June 2007, emerged as a quasi-state with internal sovereignty. Egypt enjoys a peace treaty with Israel and a strategic alliance with the US, whereas Hamas is in conflict with Israel, and is designated by the US as a terrorist group. This thesis traces the interactions between Hamas and Egypt during the 2006-2014 period, with a focus on the Mubarak era. The dissertation’s main aim is not only to present how and when asymmetry and strategic differences between Hamas and Egypt were reflected in their relations, but also to explain why and how on certain occasions their interactions took on the form of tactical cooperation. Hence, I show that small or quasi-states in the contemporary Middle East are in position to extract political gains from larger neighbouring state actors even in the presence of strategic differences. This thesis contextualises the situations it discusses through Omni Balancing Theory (OBT), which understands an actor’s foreign policy as the outcome of the efforts of its leader to survive politically by balancing between external and internal threats. In this regard, Egypt’s approach towards Hamas and vice versa at a given time is seen as the result of a cost-benefit calculation that has assessed the value of simultaneous foreign and domestic threats. Accordingly, the dissertation looks at Hamas-Egypt relations through three lenses: firstly, through the impact of international and regional pressures; secondly, through cross-border interactions; and thirdly, through the effect of domestic pressures. Finally, the thesis separately discusses the course of Hamas-Egypt relations between February 2011 and August 2014. This is due to the density of the political developments during this period. To be precise, the three weak post-Mubarak Egyptian governments faced quite diverse threats the dealing of which generated considerable fluctuations in Cairo’s approach towards Hamas.

Numerous authoritarian states use institutions usually associated with democratic regimes like a constitution, elections, and a legislature. This seems to be counterintuitive. Authoritarian regimes should rather shrink away from democratic institutions. Elections can be won by the opposition and legislatures can make decisions against the interests of the ruler. So, why do autocratic regimes install institutions which limit their power and threaten their survival in office? Assuming actors behave rationally, one should expect authoritarian rulers only to introduce procedures working in their favor. This study looks at the effect of institutions in authoritarian regimes. The findings suggest that legislatures significantly lower the chances of regime breakdown in the long run. However, particularly in election years, authoritarian regimes are facing a higher likelihood of failure.

This thesis analyzes the evolution of the relationship between the Hashemite regime and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood from 1946 to 2007. Reformist and pragmatic rhetoric of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood distinct from the most of other Muslim Brotherhood branches operating in different countries in the Middle East enabled it to set up relatively harmonious relations with the Hashemite regime without being declared as illegal even in crisis periods. While focusing on this interesting case, this study reveals that the relationship between the Hashemite regime and the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood is mostly affected and shaped by two variables: regime survival concern and the regional context. In this regard, it maintains that the relations between the two parties have evolved around the policies of coexistence, cooperation, control and repression as well as containment with respect to the change in regime&rsquo / s survival concern and regional developments related to the Palestinian issue. This thesis argues that the period from 1946, when the Muslim Brotherhood was legalized as a charitable organization in Jordan, to the end of 1980s is generally marked with a coherent and cooperative relations between the two parties since their interests overlapped. However, since the beginning of 1990s the relationship began to deteriorate due to a shift in the interests of both parties as a result of developments in the regional context, namely Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the rise of political Islam globally.

The Arab Spring, the protests that spread through the Arab world, led to very different outcomes in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. That some regimes survived during the Arab Spring and some experienced regime-change has been explained through political, economic and social perspectives. This desk-study investigates how the Moroccan government addressed popular discontent during and after the Arab spring in 2011. In order to examine the case study through a new theoretical angle, this research applies the Theory of Policy Substitutability by Amy Oakes (2012) to the chosen case study. This study identifies that the Moroccan government used political reform, repression, a sort of economic reform and the use of cultural symbols were put in place to lower the intensity of protests. The findings underline that the government used a number of tactics that can be analyzed through the concept of diversionary tactics, meaning the diversion from internal struggle.   This research adds value to the discussion about regime survival in the case of the Moroccan Arab Spring not only by applying the Theory of PS as a structuring device for existing explanations of regime survival, it furthermore adds value by giving an example of how scholars can examine qualitatively how the concept of diversionary tactics (military and non-military responses) can have applicability.

No description available.

Economic reform packages became important for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) by the 1980s. Mainly as a result of the growing external debt, together with the regional stagnation that began after the second oil shock in the early 1980s, most of the MENA countries were affected by economic crisis. As a response to the economic crises, which also mostly resulted in regime legitimacy crises, many MENA countries initiated economic liberalization programs in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. In some of the Middle Eastern states, these economic liberalization processes were followed or accompanied by political liberalization policies. This thesis analyzes the political economy of reform in Jordan between 1989-2002 with reference to globalization. This thesis chooses Jordan as a case study since Jordan has been regarded as a successful case in implementing economic reforms envisaged in the Washington Consensus by the IMF and World Bank, and a country holding prospects for democracy. In this respect, this study seeks to find out why and how economic liberalization reforms were implemented in Jordan. In addition to that, this thesis displays how domestic and external factors affected both the rationale behind and the implementation of economic and political reforms in the country. The basic conclusion of this thesis is that regime survival is the main concern for the economic and political liberalization processes in Jordan.

This PhD thesis examines the Gulf monarchies of Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates as they strive to transform their political economies away from dependency on hydrocarbon revenues into more diverse sectors of economic activity. In particular, the research attempts to forecast the monarchies’ chances of achieving the transformation into principally private sector-led economies, while maintaining absolute rule and excluding those outside the circle of the ruling élites from political power or influence. The central research question guiding the study is ‘Human and National Security in Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates – Should Climate Change Matter?’ The effects of climate change provide a useful lens through which to examine each of the states’ policies and actions as they attempt to cope with the physical degradation of an already water and heat-stressed environment, coupled with declining oil and gas revenues from the West as a result of international climate change agreements. The thesis applies a ten question research framework to each of the entities to produce individual case studies for comparison. The research finds that climate change is acknowledged as an issue by each of the states, but is not at the top of their list of priorities. Rather, measures to improve human security are aimed at maximising the economic productiveness of each country to make up the deficit caused by decreasing hydrocarbon revenues and enable the monarchies to maintain the high level of free and subsidised state services they currently provide to their populations. They believe the effective maintenance of services directly contributes to political stability which assures the continuance of their current system of governance where political power lies solely with the rulers and their close advisors. Essentially, the priority for each of the ruling families is not climate change, but regime survival, preferably in its current form.

No description available.