This paper uses a model of governance in higher education, called the political model, that explains the role of universities as agencies of control and socialization, with a resulting repercussion on the quality of education. It compares this model with common models such as the academic, Napoleonic, market-oriented and managerial. It undertakes a review of ten published cases studies, each dealing with the oldest public universities in ten Arab countries, using a historical approach, from their inception until 2016. Among the ten public universities, nine fall into the category of the political model, while the tenth represents the Napoleonic model. The discussion opens the field for further research.

This article addresses the geopolitics of Bab-al-Mandeb in the war on Yemen, which began in 2015 and continues to this day, in the context of a global pandemic. It makes the hypothesis that securing Bab-al-Mandeb is fundamental for US imperialism. For reasons to do with its global hegemony, the United States cannot permit another force, specifically the Houthis of Yemen, to exercise control over Bab-al-Mandeb. Although many reasons could account for the senseless war, the security of Bab-al-Mandeb—a strategic chokepoint of trade and oil flows— over-determinedly (as in an Althusserian concept) explains the war’s continuity.

This paper provides an historical exploration of local governance in Yemen across the past sixty years. It highlights the presence of a strong tradition of local self-rule, self-help, and participation “from below” as well as the presence of a rival, official, political culture upheld by central elites that celebrates centralization and the strong state. Shifts in the predominance of one or the other tendency have coincided with shifts in the political economy of the Yemeni state(s). When it favored the local, central rulers were compelled to give space to local initiatives and Yemen experienced moments of political participation and local development.

This research paper focuses on Gulf–Iran relations within the framework of the bilateral relationship between Oman and Iran. This relationship is unique as well as distinct from Oman’s relations with the other nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and has a direct influence on Gulf regional security. Oman’s relationship with Iran has grown stronger and firmer after the events of the Arab Spring. This comes at a time when the Gulf countries are suffering worsening internal security, political and economic conditions and disagree amongst themselves about how to deal with Iran. Hence, the Omani-Iranian rapprochement is intensifying the security anxieties of the GCC countries. This paper examines the conceptual frameworks for security and cooperation within the GCC. Oman’s view on security and cooperation is seen in its foreign policy which adheres to non-intervention and neutrality in foreign affairs. Omani-Iranian relations are analyzed in how they affect Gulf integration and the role played by Oman in the Iranian nuclear deal. The paper concludes by discussing Oman’s position on the current conflict in Yemen and its effect on Gulf security as well as Oman’s role in mediation between the parties in the conflict.

This article examines reasons for the ineffectiveness of foreign aid interventions in developing countries, using the examples of Yemen, Egypt and Jordan. It starts with a review of two contradictory theories used to explain foreign aid ineffectiveness: the public interest perspective (PIP) and the public choice perspective (PCP). On the basis of the PCP, this article shows that deficiencies are locked within a vicious circle of a poor policy and institutional environments in developing countries and donors' self-interest. The article ends by proposing a third explanation of foreign aid ineffectiveness that goes beyond the scope of the PCP.

The paper places in historical perspective the current Arab uprisings. It argues that the reasons behind them lie in the comprehensive political, social, economic and educational failures of the Arab regimes. It documents these failures statistically and analytically. It goes on to provide analysis of the current developments in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Yemen and the rest of the affected states. It concludes by drawing up the implications on the Arab future of these uprisings.