Contemporary Review of the Middle East

This study examines the influence of the translator’s ideology on the translation of political news from English to Arabic, addressing a research gap in which prior studies often focus on isolated cases or monolingual discourse evaluations. Rather than examining isolated lexical choices, this study demonstrates how recurrent labels such as “martyrs” and “terrorists” operate within broader institutional and ideological framing mechanisms across translated political news. By comparing parallel reports across languages and media systems, the study highlights how recurring lexical patterns function as ethical and ideological positioning tools that systematically reshape narrative responsibility and audience alignment. The study employs van Dijk’s framework of critical discourse analysis (CDA) to discern persistent ideological shifts at the lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic levels. The results indicate that translators, whether through deliberate decisions or institutional limitations, substantially shape ideological framing, contesting the presumption of neutrality in media translation.

This study examines Kuwait’s relations with both the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) from 1961 to 1990, within the broader context of the Cold War and the division of Europe. Grounded in small state theory and drawing on theoretical frameworks of hedging strategies, economic statecraft, and strategic neutrality, the study analyzes how Kuwait pursued a balanced foreign policy toward the two Germanies—combining strategic neutrality with economic openness—while deliberately avoiding alignment with either bloc. Relations with the FRG were characterized by full diplomatic recognition and robust cooperation in trade and technical fields, whereas ties with the GDR remained limited and largely symbolic. Drawing on archival records, trade statistics, and diplomatic sources, the study demonstrates how Kuwait’s foreign policy exemplifies key theoretical frameworks of small-state behavior, including hedging strategies and economic statecraft that consistently prioritize national interests, while strategically employing ideological rhetoric when necessary. It further offers an analytical reflection on how this historical experience continues to shape Gulf foreign policy today, suggesting that the balancing strategies adopted by small states like Kuwait during the Cold War remain theoretically and practically relevant amid the evolving dynamics of the contemporary international order.

This article reinterprets Lebanon’s 2019 financial collapse through the lens of David Harvey’s theory of neoliberalism, with a particular focus on Accumulation by Dispossession (ABD). It argues that dominant paradigms—sectarianism, externalism, merchant republicanism, and anti-colonialism—fail to adequately explain the structural transformations underpinning Lebanon’s post-Taif political economy. By introducing ABD as a legalized, state-sanctioned mechanism of elite enrichment, this study makes a crucial distinction between systemic dispossession embedded in law and institutions and corruption as an illegal or unethical deviation from them. This distinction reframes Lebanon’s crisis not as a failure of governance alone but as the outcome of a deliberate neoliberal project that restructured the economy to facilitate upward wealth transfer. The article draws on Harvey’s framework to reinterpret Lebanon’s neoliberal trajectory and positions the 2019 uprising as a class-based revolt against decades of legalized dispossession. It concludes by calling for a research agenda that centers ABD in analyses of neoliberalism in the Global South.

This article investigates the extent to which the European Union’s (EU) exercise of power has contributed to Türkiye’s political identity transformation, with particular focus on the period surrounding the 2015 refugee crisis. Drawing on post-structuralist theory, especially Michel Foucault’s conceptions of power, discourse, and subjectivity, the article explores how asymmetrical identity constructions operate within EU–Türkiye relations. Through a qualitative discourse analysis of EU reports, official statements, and Turkish political rhetoric, this article argues that the EU’s conditionality-based approach reproduces a hierarchical relationship, reinforcing Türkiye’s status as a normative outsider. In response, Türkiye has developed a counter-hegemonic discourse centered on sovereignty, cultural autonomy, and strategic indispensability. This dual process reveals a dynamic of mutual identity construction: while the EU defines itself through the exclusion of Türkiye, Ankara constructs its identity in opposition to the EU’s liberal-democratic paradigm. By unpacking these discursive formations, the article contributes to a critical understanding of enlargement politics, power asymmetries, and the relational nature of identity in international relations. The findings underscore how discourse functions not only as a mode of interaction but as a site of resistance, reproduction, and symbolic struggle.

This article examines how individuals’ perceptions of free choice influence their likelihood to engage in unconventional political activism, including signing petitions, joining boycotts, demonstrations, and strikes, across transitional regimes in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, and how this relationship is mediated by each country’s voice and accountability score. By merging the sixth and seventh waves of the World Values Survey datasets, with a sample of more than 15,000 participants, the study employed Bayesian multilevel multivariate modeling and compared the studied countries. The main findings of the study contradict prevailing theories built on democratic contexts that emphasize a strong correlation between free choice and unconventional participation. First, the analysis revealed that perceived free choice is not a driving factor for unconventional political engagement. While there are minor correlations with joining boycotts and demonstrations, free choice shows no significant effects on signing petitions and joining strikes. Second, this relationship is not significantly mediated by the countries’ voice and accountability score. Third, the correlation exhibits a complex cubic relationship rather than a linear association.

The Al-Aqsa Flood Operation launched by Hamas on October 7, 2023, constituted a profound shock to regional stability, prompting questions about its strategic rationale given the anticipated severe Israeli retaliation. This article argues that the timing and execution of the operation are primarily explicable when situated within the escalating geopolitical competition and shifting alignments in the Middle East, particularly the drive toward Israeli–Arab normalization and the proposed India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEC). From this perspective, Hamas’s attack can be analyzed as a calculated, albeit high-risk, intervention designed to disrupt these transformative regional projects, which were perceived by Hamas and its regional allies, notably Iran, as detrimental to their respective interests and the broader Palestinian cause. Applying a Neoclassical Realist framework, the analysis explores how a non-state actor, such as Hamas, responds to these evolving systemic and regional dynamics, driven by an assessment of threats and opportunities within this wider power contest. By focusing on these overarching regional interests and rivalries, this article seeks to explain the October 7 attacks as a critical juncture in the re-emerging multipolar competition, where Hamas’s actions, while rooted in the Palestinian context, were shaped and enabled by broader geopolitical currents aimed at challenging the US-led regional order and its associated diplomatic initiatives.