Sykes-Picot Research Articles

إرث بلفور: بريطانيا والصهيونية والطريق المثير للجدل إلى قيام إسرائيل

The research provides an overview of the rise of the Zionist movement, starting from the establishment of the Jewish Colonial Society in 1891 by Maurice de Hirsch, leading to the formation of the World Zionist Organization and the creation of the Jewish National Fund in 1901. It discusses the controversial debates over the location of a Jewish homeland, including the Uganda Scheme, and the advocacy for Palestine by figures like Herzl. The impact of World War I on the Middle East was influenced by the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916 and the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which supported the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. The British Mandate in Palestine, established after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, had significant impacts on Jewish immigration, Arab displacement, and the road to statehood. The United Nations eventually issued a resolution in 1947 to divide Palestine into two states, one for Jews and one for Arabs. This was accepted by Jews but rejected by Arab states. Great Britain's actions towards the end of the mandate aimed to frustrate the establishment of the Jewish state envisioned by the United Nations plan. Drawing on primary and secondary sources from esteemed archives such as the British Library and personal accounts, this research seeks to elucidate the complex historical backdrop, contextualizing key decisions and conflicts that ultimately shaped the creation of the State of Israel. The analysis aims to provide nuanced insights into divergent perspectives held by Palestinians and Israelis regarding the resolution of this enduring conflict, rooted in a legacy of geopolitical manoeuvring and ideological fervour.

State formation in the Mashrek region. Historical narratives of state-building and national history since the Sykes-Picot Agreement

State formation in the Mashrek region. Historical narratives of state-building and national history since the Sykes-Picot Agreement

Politics of Archaeology in the Late Ottoman Empire: The Case of a British Aristocrat

Politics of Archaeology in the Late Ottoman Empire:The Case of a British Aristocrat Özge Aslanmirza (bio) KEYWORDS Mark Sykes, archaeology, Britain, Ottoman Empire, Middle East Mark Sykes was an eminent British diplomat and agent, known today largely for the Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916), which led to the partition of the post-Ottoman Middle East. Indeed, he was an active figure in the creation of the Mandate regimes in the region after the end of the First World War. He was also known as a member of Parliament and specialist on the Middle East due to his frequent travels, although he was a lay scholar. He had attended diverse schools, both in Britain and abroad, and he had dropped out of Cambridge University. Nevertheless, he was passionate and curious about history, politics, archaeology, geography, and linguistics. His aristocratic background provided him with numerous opportunities, including travelling and conducting amateur research in the Middle East. By combining his diverse abilities, political connections and immense interest in the Middle East, he would become one of the most influential figures in British politics and foreign policy. This article will explore Mark Sykes' use of archaeology as a political tool, based on archival sources; namely, The Papers of Mark Sykes, a collection currently held at Hull University. I made use of the microfilm versions of these documents from the Turkish Historical Foundation. Alongside this, I benefited from the archival sources at the Hull History Centre, and the Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi). Sykes was the son of a "world wanderer" and trader, who was himself particularly fascinated by the Middle East. In his youth, he had read popular Orientalist books, such as Richard Burton's translation of the Arabian Nights,1 as well as travelled with his father, Tatton Sykes, to the Middle East; later, he would be fascinated by his Cambridge professors' knowledge of antiquity. As [End Page 261] may be gleaned from Mark Sykes' writings, his father was familiar with the local people of the Middle East. For instance, in 1888, when he made his trip to Egypt, Sykes stated that he learned about the antiquities of the region from the Sirdar Lord Greenfell,2 who had close relations with the Sykes family. In the biography of Mark Sykes written by his grandson, Christopher Simon Sykes, he conveys that during Mark Sykes' journeys in the Levant, "he befriended the sheiks of different tribes, who told him of the local sights, kept him fed and watered, and more importantly gave him their protection."3 A year later, when he went to Jerusalem, Sykes related that "one of the old Sheikh Fellah recognized me and shouted to the crowd that I was his son."4 This example indicates the close relationship between Sykes and the locals. Although the travel notes of Tatton Sykes have not survived to the present day, it is likely that Mark Sykes' father was engaged in intelligence gathering activities, which would influence the later career of his son. Like his father, Mark Sykes was able to travel safely in different regions throughout the Middle East. He worked for a long time with an experienced dragoman, named İsa Kıbrıslı, who knew the region well. Kıbrıslı was an experienced guide, who had previously been employed by "Lord Chelmsford in the Abyssinian campaign and accompanied Sir Charles Wilson to Mount Sinai."5 The journey which is the subject of this paper took place when he was nineteen years old, in 1898. This was also the time when small scale explorations were transforming into more systematic and larger-scaled ones.6 Thus, the case of Sykes fits into the zeitgeist of the era, particularly considering his further investment in politics began with his journeys to the Middle East for the purposes of knowledge gathering. The original notes kept during the journey, as well as his related sketches, are among the Papers of Mark Sykes catalogued under the title of 'Journey from Jericho to Damascus.' His notes and observations were originally published as an article in the 1899 issue of Palestine Exploration Quarterly, the journal of Palestine Exploration Fund.7 The PEF is important in the...

The policy of confessional particularism of the French authorities in Mandatory Syria in 1920–1946

The paper discusses the confessional principles of the territorial structure of Syria during its stay in the status of a French mandated territory. The authors prefaced their analysis with a description of the process of establishing a French colonial administration in Syria, in particular, the conclusion of the Anglo-French Sykes-Picot agreement on the division of the Middle East and, in particular, Greater Syria, into spheres of influence that determined the modern borders of the Middle Eastern states. The instrumental role of confessional differences in the struggle of the French authorities in Syria with the popular idea of pan-Arabism in the region is shown. Predominantly according to the confessional principle, the territory of Syria was fragmented by the French into 5 regions-states, which, firstly, determined the subsequent loss of control by Damascus over Lebanon and the Alexandretta Sanjak, and secondly, laid the foundation for the emergence of separatist tendencies and future domestic instability. However, as the authors of the paper show in the short term, the policy of the French imperialists failed. Paris failed to use Christians to put down the Druze and Sunni uprisings. However, after the French left the territory of Syria, there was a conflict between large ethno-confessional groups (Sunnis, Alawites and Druzes), the consequences of which were especially sharply exposed already in the 2010s.

ÇUKUROVA STRATEGY OF FRANCE IN THE NATIONAL STRUGGLE PERİOD

After the second half of the 18th century; the imperialist policies of the states such as England, Russia and Austria on the Ottoman Empire, caused significant changes in France's strategy in North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean. Although the Ottoman Empire tried to carry out its foreign policy with its balance policies until the end of the century, it couldn’t prevent the transfer of population to the western states in order to establish colonies under the name of commercial activities in its territory. The privileges granted by the capitulations with the 1839 Tanzimat and 1856 Islahat edicts, known as the enactment movements in the Ottoman Empire, increased the population of a new western settler dealing with trade under the name of "Levantine (eastern)" in the Ottoman lands. As well as the missionary schools opened in the region with this population, organized and supported by the separatist Arab population in Lebanon and Jordan. Despite the great defeat of the Ottoman Emperor against Russia in 1878 and the subsequent Berlin Congress, France set its sights on the North African lands (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt) and occupied them one by one. Although this occupation, France had to withdraw from Egypt, three years later, which was on the eastern trade route of England. By the First World War, France's eastern strategy became clear with the Sykes-Picot Agreement signed between two other allies, England and Russia. Along with Syria and Lebanon, France seized the opportunity to gain control over Çukurova, which has become a center of attraction for the French Levantines since 1860 and also the raw material warehouse of many industrial products. The occupation of this region, which was of vital importance for the French industry, which lost most of its Western and African colonies to England, would be a very valuable gain. The aim of this study is to analyze the strategy of the Çukurova Region, which was the basis of France's eastern strategy and also was occupied by the Syria Alliance with Britain after the First World War.

Oil policy and investment licenses contracts in Iraq (analytical study)

As it is known, oil is one of the most important economic resources in Iraq, therefore the oil policy is the cornerstone for the investment of this vital resource, where it contributes to the revenues of the Iraqi budget were more than 90%. Since the discovery of Baba Gharghar field in Kirkuk at the beginning of the twentieth century, the retreat of the Ottoman Empire authority, the British occupation of Iraq began, and after Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, the right of exploration and exploitation of oil became for the British with 25% as a share for the French, so Iraqi oil was monopolized by the Iraqi Oil Company (IPC), under the concession agreement granted since 1928. The British and French monopoly companies exploited oil and extracted in large quantities and randomly to increase profits with a small share for the country which owns the resources. This resulted in the issue of Act No.80 for 1961 in the Republican era, which enabled Iraq to recover 99% of the land that was under the control of foreign companies. The National Oil Company was established under Act. No. 11 for 1964, and in the 1970s the operations of Iraq Oil Company Limited were nationalized, giving the National Oil Company the opportunity to explore, exploit and produce oil. In fact, nationalization constituted a significant qualitative leap in terms of increasing oil revenues, in addition to the prosperity and development, especially after the rise of oil prices in the seventies. But after 1980 and the entry of Iraq in fruitless wars, reflected on the nationalization achievements; production of oil declined significantly, especially after 1990 and the invasion of Kuwait till the occupation of Iraq in 2003, which led to the looting of oil fields and the destruction of some of them, therefore the oil sector was in a serious situation, prompting the operators in this sector in 2009 to resort to rounds of licenses to reinvest investment and production in this sector, in fact this option is a justification for the advancement of the Iraqi oil sector at present, but it is no longer the best option to promote it.

Manifestations of changing geopolitical influence in the Middle East at the beginning of the third millennium

The year 2016 represents a qualitative change in the regional and international geopolitical movement, as it represents the centenary of the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement on the one hand, and the beginning of the end for the terrorist organization Daash in practice. This has an impact on the geopolitical behavior of countries that are active in the international political decision or those that influence it regionally, and even those that want to be It has a current and future role for a stage that has its aftermath of changes. The geopolitical behavior in itself needs a renewed understanding, especially with the multiplicity and change of its actors on the one hand, and the different ways of expressing and representing it theoretically and realistically on the geographical area of the Middle East on the other hand. This research sheds light with a geopolitical vision on the changes taking place in the region in terms of traditional power actors and the desire of new powers to play a more important role in the geographical scope that they may affect.

Footsteps of a Victorian Woman in the Ottoman Middle East: Edith Sykes’ Travel Notes

Edith Violet Sykes (1872-1930) is an undiscovered character in the historiography of travel literature. She is the wife of a British agent and diplomat Sir Mark Sykes, who was renowned for his deeds in the Middle East and the Sykes-Picot Agreement. She is actively engaged in politics, establishing Chaldean Relief Committee for Armenian and Assyrian populations, and criticizing the violence in Ireland. Her travel notes in 1906 in the Ottoman Middle East shed light on her Orientalist mindset, the construction of East vis-à-vis the West, and how Victorian-born woman approaches this land and its people. In that sense, the purpose of this article is multifarious: First of all, this study will be the initial presentation of the unpublished travel notes of Edith Sykes. Secondly, the different assets of the Ottoman Middle East such as rivalry among the tribes, people’s living, and political disturbances will be discerned through the British woman whose narration provides assistance for the transition of events into political discourse.

THE ARMENİANS DISCLAIMER ACTIVITY POLICY DURİNG THE FİRST WORLD WAR

The territorial claims and activities of the Armenians are based on the statements and reports conveyed to the organizations by Christian missionaries and consulates operating in Eastern and South Eastern Anatolia during the First World War. During the First World War, the Armenians were very active on the Russian side on the eve of the secret talks about the Ottoman lands. When the «Cemal Pasha proposal» proposed in the Sykes-Picot Agreement did not receive the necessary attention, and other authorities continued their struggle. Document exchange procedures in Armenian «researchers» countries where strong diaspora in Turkey and have continued to establish a systematic struggle against Turkey in every field. It has been proved after great efforts that the so-called «code-telegram instructions that prove the Armenian massacre», attributed to Talat Pasha, are false documents. The study examined under two main headings the «Cemal Pasha Proposal» and «False documents belonging to Talat Pasha». In the findings section of the study, information is given about the purpose of the preparation of the «proposal» and «telegram», the preparation and presentation process, the political and sociological audience it serves, its results and the party to take responsibility.

THE BRITISH MANDATE AND THE UPRISING OF 1920 IN IRAQ

The article examines the initial period of the mandate administration of Iraq by Great Britain, the anti-British uprising of 1920. The chronological framework covers the period from May 1916 to October 1921 and includes an analysis of events in the Middle East from May 1916, when the secret agreement on the division of the territories of the Ottoman Empire after the end of World War I (the Sykes-Picot agreement) was concluded before the proclamation of Faisal as king of Iraq and from the formation of the country՚s government. This period is a key one in the Iraqi-British relations at the turn of the 10-20s of the ХХ century. The author focuses on the Anglo-French negotiations during the First World War, on the eve and during the Paris Peace Conference on the division of the territory of the Ottoman Empire and the ownership of the territories in the Arab zone. During these negotiations, it was decided to transfer the mandates for Syria (with Lebanon) to the France, and Palestine and Mesopotamia (Iraq) to Great Britain. The British in Iraq immediately faced strong opposition from both Sunnis and Shiites, resulting in an anti-English uprising in 1920. The author describes the causes, course and consequences of this uprising.

Futile Efforts to Create an Arab Kingdom of Syria. From the Idea of Greater Syria to Syria Partitioned under the French Mandate (1915–1922)

The text presents the dynamics and variability of the political options and alliances which shaped the borders of modern Syria in the most crucial period of World War I and the first years of post-war reality in the Middle East. The researchers show how the external interests of the Great Powers took priority over the Syrians’ internal affairs. For the inhabitants of the Levant, it meant the Western practice of ignoring Arab opinions and aspirations in the aftermath of the Great War, which was sealed in the Treaty of Versailles. Despite the positive solutions proposed by The King-Crane Commission (1919), the new post-Ottoman order ignored local identities and political preferences. The new borders were created artificially and determined arbitrarily. The Sykes-Picot agreement reinforced both conspiracy theories in the Middle East and the mythology of the Great Arab Revolt. The competing Western powers took advantage of the local minorities, fueling dislike and strengthening sectarianism. In the years 1919–1920, Pan-Syrianism solidified and took a characteristic form of striving to consolidate the fragmented nation of the Greater Syria. The resolutions of the General Syrian Congress of 2 July 1919 provided timeless premises for the political orientation of the Syrian nationalists, which strongly influenced politics in the Middle East in the following decades. However, the partition of Greater Syria after World War I proved to be one of the worst of many political traumas experienced in the Middle East at that time. Pan-Syrianism was systematically weakened by the conflicting aspirations among the Syrians, the Lebanese, the Palestinians, and Jordanians.

Covering ISIS in the British media: Exploring agenda-setting in The Guardian newspaper

Abstract Self-proclaimed ‘Islamic State’ (ISIS) hit the news headlines across the globe in the post-Arab Uprisings period. Its main aim was to replace the ‘colonialist borders’ of the Middle East created with the Sykes–Picot agreement in 1916. One of the atrocities of this terror network was against a minority in Iraq, the Yazidis. Whereas other victims of ISIS, such as Alawites, Druze, Ismailis and Turkmen, have not been covered thoroughly in the British and US media, Yazidis – in particular Yazidi women – dominated the titles. Notwithstanding, the framing of the Yazidis has been influential in the engagement of the Obama administration against ISIS’ move in the Levant; the Kurdish minority is still under threat today because of their ethnic and religious identity. This article discusses how agenda-setting effects the news media’s power to shape individual attitudes and public opinion. The Guardian’s agenda-setting is discussed in this article as a credible, ‘most liberal’ and ‘most trusted’ news brand in the United Kingdom. A content analysis of news articles regarding the plight of Yazidi population in Iraq and its continuous coverage mostly focusing on Yazidi women was conducted, with the articles published at the time when the crisis broke out. The authors of this article apply the notions of an ‘East–West’ divide and ‘Othering’ to frame ISIS’ move in Mount Sinjar, Iraq. The study emphasizes that The Guardian not only set the agenda by prioritizing the circumstances of the Yazidi population, but also deployed frameworks of ‘orientalist’ depictions of Yazidi women as slaves of ISIS.

Deconstructing the Sykes-Picot Myth: Frontiers, Boundaries, Borders and the Evolution of Ottoman Territoriality

This study aims to evaluate the emergence of the Sykes-Picot order and deconstruct its mythologization by proposing an evolutionary assessment of border understanding. This study addresses the following primary research questions: How did the interplay of domestic, regional, and international developments lay the groundwork for the formation of the Sykes-Picot territorial order? How was the administrative structure and regional divisions before the Sykes-Picot agreement and to which border categorizations did these structures correspond? Was the Sykes-Picot agreement the only international intervention that affected the borders of the region or were there other international interventions before the Sykes-Picot agreement? This study argues that the history of Middle Eastern border formation is not only an international one but also involves many aspects that have not widely been taken into consideration. In doing so, this paper adopts a critical historical perspective to analyze the evolution of Middle Eastern borders. This paper proposes a three-tracked evolutionary analytical framework (frontiers, boundaries, borders) to analyze the emergence of borders and applies it to the emergence of Ottoman territoriality. This study concludes that the Sykes-Picot agreement is only one, complementary part of a long process in the emergence of Middle Eastern geopolitics.

The Relationships between the Soviet Union and the Turkey (1920-1930) and its impact on the Kurdish issue

Relations between Russia and Turkey have gone through five centuries at different stages, sometimes in difficult wars and conflicts, sometimes in harmony and good relations. However, conditions changed in the eighteenth century, when the Ottoman Empire was weakened and disintegrated. Russia played an important role in cutting down parts of the Caucasus and Central Asia, as well as in reducing the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, which was considered a great nation for centuries.
 At the end of the First World War, after the victory of the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia, Russian troops withdrew from the war fronts. The Bolshevik government exposed the secret clauses of the Sykes-Picot Agreement and concluded the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in 1918, with the Quadruple Alliance, led by Germany and the Ottoman Empire.
 The Ottoman Empire, like its German ally, took advantage of the withdrawal of Russian troops from the war fronts. In contrast to the agreement, attacks were launched on the Caucasus regions controlled by Russian Russia. However, following the emergence of the Turkish National Movement, led by Mustafa Kemal and the signing of the Sevre Treaty and there were changes in the war fronts, as in the political arena. Russia, which became Soviet Russia at that time, found a new friend and ally, which had common interests with Soviet Russia, against the Ottoman Empire, on the one hand, and Britain and France on the other. Both countries have benefited from this friendship and alliance.
 But at a time when the Kurds, especially in the Ottoman Kurdistan, had a chance to move towards achieving their goals and national rights, and at least making some progress in accordance with the provisions of the Sovereign Convention on the Rights of the Kurds. As the first country to recognize and establish diplomatic relations with Turkey with the help of the Kemalist Movement in various ways, Russia, as well as economic, industrial and mining assistance, became a great supporter of Turkey in international and diplomatic forums.
 All this, along with many other factors, helped the Republic of Turkey stand on its own feet. When the revolutions and movements against the injustice and tyranny of the Turks occurred in Northern Kurdistan in the 1920s and 1930s, Soviet Russia sided with all possible means, military and political, as well as the Turkish Republic. Which brutally suppressed these uprisings and every move of a Kurdish nationalist nature.

A Neoclassical Realist Explanation of the Balfour Declaration and the Origins of the British Foreign Policy in Palestine

A number of developments in the first quarter of the 20th century have an important role in shaping the Middle East. The Sharif Hussein-Mc Mahon Negotiations, the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Balfour Declaration and other secret agreements between Britain and France that emerged during the First World War deeply affected the subsequent period of Arab geography. The Balfour Declaration in 1917 can be called one of the founding texts of Israel. In this respect, the declaration has a great impact on all the Middle Eastern politics, especially Palestine. It will not be wrong to say that the Palestine issue, which has become one of the most important problems of the region in time, has its roots in the Balfour Declaration. For this reason, cognizance of the Balfour Declaration and Britain's Palestinian politics after the First World War is crucial to understand the region's later history. From this point of view, this article attempts to examine the regional policies of Britain through the declaration and to provide a causality for the emergence of the declaration. What is the key motivation behind the Balfour Declaration? How can one explain the emergence of the declaration only in 1917, although it came to the agenda in Britain as early as 1915? This study claims that a particular set of internal and external factors associated with British politics gave rise to the declaration. The present article dissects these factors from the perspective of neoclassical realist theory and evaluate the systemic modifiers and unit-level variables in order to explain the Balfour Declaration. Specifically, it examines decision-making process behind the declaration from a systematic and holistic perspective.

Saudi Arabia–Iran Contention and the Role of Foreign Actors

ABSTRACTThe Sykes–Picot Agreement, the Iranian Revolution, the Gulf Wars, and other events that have unfolded after the Arab Uprising (the Arab Spring), have altered the course of West Asian history. Saudi Arabia and Iran are the new architects determining the course and its trajectory; also significant is the presence of foreign powers. As is evident that oil has been a crucial factor behind the West’s interests in the region. The article states that the new Cold War can be explained as a variance between Iran and Saudi Arabia; and the situation manoeuvred by foreign actors. The region’s geostrategic significance coupled with resource politics and aspiring influence, apart from the sectarian dimension, has been the motivating factor for the emergent squabble between the regional and global players. Much of it can be seen in the context of the geostrategic energy war in Syria, proxy wars in countries like Yemen and political unrest in Bahrain, also risking smaller vulnerable states like Qatar and Lebanon. The article argues that the current situation is a product of a struggle between the two regional powers and the positioning of the US and Russia in the changing dynamics. It evaluates the continuing adversity, emphasising that the crisis is significantly driven by geo-economic factors, and is not merely confined to the regional hegemony aspect.

Arab Public Debate on the “Deal of the Century” in the “Versailles” Framework

The Trump administration has reportedly planned to publish its self-drafted Middle East peace initiative some time during the year 2019, exactly 100 years after the Treaty of Versailles (1919) was signed. Although previous and subsequent agreements, declarations and treaties, such as the Sykes-Picot Agreement (1916), the Balfour Declaration (1917), the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) had much more to do with the fate of the Middle East than the Treaty of Versailles itself, the coincidence of the announcement of the “deal of the century” with the anniversary of “Versailles” provides great significance to the latter in current Arab public debate. While the above mentioned events and decisions did not meaningfully hinder the long-term Israeli–Palestinian peace process, the “deal of the century” might have harmful effects for it. Arab leaders as well as opinionmakers of all kinds agree on the existence of a strong parallel between the aims and design of the Versailles-related treaties and those of the “deal of the century.” They agree that both of them deny the right of self-determination to Arab nations and that they are both designed to foreshadow decades of bloody conflicts between the nations of the Middle East. The “deal of the century” might also sanctify the “acquisition of land by force” which has clear implications for state-to-state relations. In my analysis, I will provide a snapshot of the Arab public debate on the “deal of the century” and how it is related to the anniversary of the Treaty of Versailles and related agreements.

Pan-Islamism. Attempt of Political Islam in the Restoration of Caliphate a Century after its Abolition in 1924

The phase of geo-political developments taking place in the Middle East as the aftermath of so called Arab Spring has entered the region into a new era of imbroglio transition. One of the peculiarities of the ME new era is the major event of emergence of the Islamic State proclaiming the re-establishment of a new Caliphate. Moreover, the restoration of Muslim Ummah as ever continuing discourse is not limited to IS. It has its crucial fundamental nostalgic origin in the Political philosophy of Islam, which wishes to form the Ummah under the doctrine of Caliphate system, which has long history since the emergence of Islam in the seventh century. What is remarkably important to pan-Islamists is that in their view the reconstruction of the Ummah is a reaction of political Islam to the Sykes-Picot agreement. This paper individuates itself by examining the socio-political manifestation of caliphate from perspective of Islamists struggling to restore the institution of Caliphate since its destruction in 1924.Keywords: Caliphate, Ummah, Political Islam, Pan-Islamism, Sykes-Picot agreement.

El nuevo marco geopolítico de Oriente Medio

El Acuerdo Sykes-Picot estructuró el Oriente Medio resultante de la descomposición del Imperio Otomano según los intereses de las potencias europeas de la época. Este diseño extra-regional se vio alterado a partir de 1945 por la emergencia de la Guerra Fría, polarizando la región. Tras la era bipolar, la creciente segurización de los asuntos internacionales tras el 11-S y el estallido de conflictos violentos en la región han relanzado el análisis geopolítico de Oriente Medio y enfatizado su carácter de “área gris”. La situación ha sido instrumentalizada por algunos actores regionales que compiten por la hegemonía y también por las grandes potencias. Se está gestando un nuevo mapa geopolítico que transformará Oriente Medio en las próximas décadas.

Palestine…It Is Something Colonial

Palestine…It Is Something Colonial