Peace Process

The end of Cold War created a unique opportunity for both the Arabs and Israelis to end their animosity and for the United States to play an important role to bring them to peace negotiations. Therefore, during the 1990s, the U.S. facilitated several rounds of talks between Syria and Israel, but the negotiations complicated gradually. The talks were stalled over the fact that Israel did not want to withdraw from the Golan Heights prior to concluding security arrangements and normalization of relations with Syria. There were variety of reasons that prevented Syria and Israel from reaching a peace agreement. Besides, unresolved issues such as the Golan Heights, the biased role of the United States in the Syrian-Israeli talks left the process at an intractable impasse. The fact that the U.S. had strategic relations with Israel and due to the increasing power of the Zionist lobby in the U.S. Congress, Washington failed to be an honest broker. Both Syrian and Israeli inflexibility, mutual mistrust and suspicious along with tentative and conditional nature of talks were proved hindrances. The U.S. could play an active role through urging both Damascus and Tel Aviv to comply with the basic and logical needs of peace, pushing the Israelis to withdraw from the Syrian territory, urging the Syrians to moderate their positions-allowing new demarcation of border-strengthening confidence-building measures between the parties and assuring them that peace will provide their basic needs, and in no way will the conflict be settled at the expense of either’s interests.

The religious nationalism in Neo-Taliban era implies a process of distancing from tribal legitimacy toward a more nationalistic narration. The research aims to understand the Religious nationalism in the approach of Neo- Taliban toward state-building and the peace process. In this regard, the social theory of Ibn Khaldun is employed to measure the process, the logic and the consequences of the birth of its religious nationalism. It becomes clear that the group spiced its religious narration with nationalist changes to win more social support and legitimacy by overcoming ethnonationalism and emphasizing on nationalistic notions that ultimately weakened its traditional legitimacy.

This study conducted a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of Arab English-language online newspapers to examine how the Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts are represented. Employing Fairclough's three-dimensional framework, the research explored the linguistic, discursive, and socio-cultural dimensions of media narratives, integrating framing theory to investigate how these narratives shape public opinion and geopolitical discourse. The study’s design involved the systematic collection and analysis of 50 articles from prominent newspapers such as Al Jazeera English, Al Arabiya English, and Asharq Al-Awsat, selected for their diverse ideological perspectives. The findings revealed distinct ideological framings employed by each outlet, ranging from systemic oppression narratives to calls for regional diplomacy. These narratives are shaped by geopolitical affiliations, cultural identities, and the affordances of digital media, including the role of algorithms and user-generated content. The research highlights how digital tools and social media amplify and polarize discourses, influencing public sentiment and policy debates. By addressing gaps in the literature concerning Arab media’s linguistic strategies and digital affordances, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the interplay between language, power, and ideology in conflict representation. Implications extend to both academic discourse and practical applications, providing a framework for policymakers, peacebuilding organizations, and journalists to critically engage with and promote balanced conflict narratives. This interdisciplinary approach underscores the evolving role of digital media in shaping political realities, offering a nuanced lens for future research on conflict discourse.

The Palestine-Israel conflict is among the most protracted disputes in recent history. Muslims and Jews have been competing for territorial, political and religious claims over the sacred land since the Ottoman Empire. The historical struggle, the establishment of the state of Israel against the wishes of local inhabitants, and Israel’s subsequent oppression and violence against Palestinians has pushed the region in an everlasting crisis, in which numerous regional and international actors are involved. Many proposals have been presented by different actors for a solution; however, neither the Palestinians nor Israelis have accepted the terms of such proposals. The idea of a two-state solution has been backed by different international actors for the lasting peace of this turbulent land, but political leaders of both Palestine and Israel have shown their reservations over this proposal. Leaders from both sides have argued for the one-state solution for many reasons. This article first discusses the existing proposals and efforts for the peaceful settlement of the land. It will then highlight the prospects and opinions of both Israel and Palestine over the status of refugees and their right of return and implementation of a two-state and one-state solution. The article will finally signpost the arguments from both sides for the resolution of the conflict, and suggest some findings by employing elite interviewing.

Yemen is the poorest Arab country in the world. The corruption of the government, the marginalization of the Houthis, and the inability of the government to meet the economic needs of the citizens of this poor Arab country have been burning in the fire of instability for more than a decade. This instability is such that the transfer of power in 2011 could not be a message of peace for this country, and finally, in 2015, the country entered into a devastating civil war. This research, using the descriptive-analytical method, has tried to investigate the roots of the crisis in Yemen and the constructive role of Iran in ending this conflict. The results of the research show that the Islamic Republic of Iran evaluates the developments in Yemen in the form of Islamic awakening, which reduces the influence of the West in the region. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran is concerned about the efforts of Saudi Arabia to manage the developments in Yemen and to empower the affiliated currents and demands that all religious and political currents play a role in the future of this country. What is important for Iran is, firstly, to play a constructive role in the developments of this country to solve the existing challenges towards the understanding of political groups, and secondly, to support its allies to prevent their forced exit from the power scene.