The article that I have today is a policy Memo, not academic article, and for those
who haven't background in public policy or don’t know what ‘policy Memo ‘ is.
I would say. Simply, Policy memo is a practical and professionally written
document that provides analysis and/or recommendations regarding a specific
situation or topic. It assumes the reader have limited knowledge, as well as little
time to conduct research about the issue of concern. In most cases, there is no
thesis statement or overall theoretical framework in the policy Memo.
Overall, the article I have is giving some insights about the future of regional middle
eastern regime. titled “The End of Sykes-Picot? Reflections on the prospects of the
Arab state system”, and it
the article revolves around this question: will the collapse of one or several Arab
States produce a new order in the region? And in order to answering this question
the author started from Syrian civil war as a most disruptive event to the status quo
order in the middle east. the author believed that the product of the Arab spring
will not a new order but a partition and collapse of states so he analyzed the syria’s
prospects for partition or collapse, and then examined the Syria neighbors
prospects for stability and finally concluded by exploring the role united states, Iran
and Israel on the conflict.
So, for organization purposes I will divide my summary into two parts, in the first
part I will summarize his analysis, and in the second part I will mention some
critiques.
Firstly, the author wrote this article 2014 and a lot of things changed afterward.
especially about the dynamics of the war on the ground in both Iraq and Syria. but
the author was seeking behind an essential question, the future of the regional
regime, so he came up with significant findings, especially in the geopolitical level.
For example, the author argued that future of Sunni majority’s war against Assad
in Syria, and the Sunni minority’s refusal to accept the new order in Iraq, and the
interplay between them will be the major challenge of the established Middle
Eastern regime.
Secondly, the author has mentioned that four of Syria’s five neighbors – Iraq,
Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan – are involved in the country’s civil war. Paying a role
by supporting one of the sides or another and being affected by its dynamics.
Regarding Iraq; it is having been very influenced by the Syrian war, from one hand,
the Shiite majority government under Nour Almaliki facilitated transfer the weapon
from Iran to the Shiite fighters alongside the regime, and excluded the Sunni’
populations, from other hand, the Sunni’s groups fought beside Sunni majority.
where the Kurds in the north maintained their full autonomy. According to the
author the gloomy status quo of Iraq will persist in the coming years.
Regarding to Jordan, the author points out that the stability of Hashemite Kingdom
is challenged by domestic opposition. where Jordan second challenge that could
threaten the kingdom existence is formation a Palestinian state, because it will
challenge the kingdom’s legitimacy and claiming the loyalty of at least part of its
Palestinian majority. The author mentioned that main impact of the Syrian civil on
Jordan was only influx of Hundreds of thousands of refugees.
Regarding Lebanon, the author believed that Lebanon is a failed state, and as long
as Hezbollah chooses to maintain the status quo, the Lebanese system is likely to
continue with few changes.
Regarding to turkey, the author believed that issue of Kurds minority who
constitute 15-20 percent of Turkish population has led their steps in Syria. Turkey
main interest is to prevent a formation of independent Kurdish statehood on the
Iraq and Syria side of the boarder which could have a radicalizing effect on their
own Kurdish population.
Finally, the author argued that both Iran and USA share the same interest in
preventing regime collapse in Syria, where the Israel has more complex outlook, it
is concern with Hizballah ‘s arsenal and not likely to initiate any action as long as
the status quo can be maintained.
however, from my point of view the article has some drawbacks, firstly, the
article didn’t answer the question whether we are going to a new regional order or
we would have only some changes, secondly, since the article has been written in
2014, a lot of strategic changes happened in the middle east. like the Russian
intervention in Syria which changed the rules of game, the American withdrawal
from region and the political vacuum which accordingly took place, the election of
trump with his new proposal for the Palestinian issue.. I think all those changes are
counts and could lead to different findings and helping in answer the article
question.