Research Library

The authors examine the varied approaches used by the U.S. and Iran during the ongoing nuclear negotiations, with particular emphasis on how each side approaches the Israeli-Palestinian arena and Iran’s entrenchment in Syria and Lebanon.

Based on their combined research on migration in Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco and Tunisia, the authors argue that states and international organizations are actively transforming the international refugee regime from within through policy “conversion,” blurring the legal distinction between the categories of refugees and migrants. European Journal of International Relations: http://bit.ly/34uwBny

Fellow Kelsey Norman examines the U.S. refugee resettlement system, which the Trump administration is steadily dismantling.

"With the U.S. and Iran staggering toward war, it bears asking: How would U.S. interests be served by war with Iran?" writes fellow Jim Krane. Read his argument for why U.S. interests would be deeply undermined by any such war on the Baker Institute Blog.  This post originally appeared in the Forbes Blog on June 17, 2019.

Fellow for the Middle East A.Kadir Yildirim and undergraduate intern Meredith McCain explore survey data on the goals, outcomes and beneficiaries of the Arab Spring protests.

On Sept. 13, 2018, Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy and George Washington University’s Project on Middle East Political Science (POMEPS) co-hosted the conference “Building Inclusive and Pluralistic States Post-Arab Spring.” The conference was the culmination of a two-year project funded by the Carnegie Corporation and showcased research by leading scholars of the Middle East on political, economic and socio-religious inclusion in Arab states since 2011. This report addresses some of the conference’s key conclusions and policy recommendations for U.S. policymakers concerned with the future stability of the Middle East.

Divisions across ethnic and religious lines in several Middle East countries since the 2011 Arab uprisings have brought renewed attention to the consociational model of governance. This student brief examines Lebanon’s consociational system in order to gauge whether it would be useful for other countries in the region experience similar ethnic or religious divisions.

Lebanon faces significant developmental challenges, including insufficient electricity supply, environmental degradation and staggering inequality, yet the government has not invested in these areas despite substantial economic growth in recent decades. This student brief uses agenda-setting theory to argue that Lebanon’s disappointing record of development is reflected in the narrow political agenda of the government. This brief is part of a two-year project on pluralism and inclusion in the Middle East post-Arab Spring. The project is generously supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

The toll of Lebanon's dual governance system weighs heavily on the state and its governance structure. The author examines the current need to formalize the country's informal senate.

The author explores consociational democracy as it has played out in Lebanon, and its possible use as a heuristic tool to rethink the relationship between communal groups, political organizations, and the state in the contemporary Middle East.