The revolutions and the uprisings in the Middle East changed the balances in the region and, consequently, Russia’s perspective on it. Russia had to face the risk of losing relatively new gains, as well as dilemmas on which side to favour, especially in the case of Libya and Syria. It can be said that Moscow generally remained a “royal realist,” standing on the side of its interest and trying to adapt its policies to the ad hoc developments. The way Russian policy will develop and the extent to which the already made choices have been successful or not are both still “under process.”

The “Arab Spring” in general and especially the Egyptian peoples’ quest for democracy have dominated the reports, analyses as well as reportages of the international academia and Press during the last months. However, less attention has been paid to the reasons why a non-democratic regime in Egypt had lasted for so long. The analysis of these factors should give a clear picture to the reader of the great difficulty in toppling Mubarak’s system and the importance of the Egyptian peoples’ revolution.

Osama is dead. Seemingly, there couldn’t be a worst time for alQaeda. The death of a leader in the midst of confusing and challenging developments is never good news for a militant “vanguard” organization like Al Qaeda, who together with the Salafi-jihadi current in general, found themselves up against the wall by the untimely winds of the Arab Spring. Nevertheless, by one of those twists of history, the death of Osama may turn into a very timely development for the survival of “Jihad

The importance of the Six Day war of 1967 lies in the major changes it brought about not only in the Middle East but also in the entire system of international affairs. Apart from its direct impact on the Palestinians, it has also led to the birth of a new group of Israeli historians who have adopted a critical approach in their study of Israel's history. They are called Post-Zionists or revinsionists and Tom Segev is one of them. Although not all New Historians have uniform views, there is a point of convergence: the Palestinian refugee problem. They have opened a discussion on the very nature of the Israeli state, with a view to exploring ways through which it could come to terms with the Palestinians. Furthermore the New Historians are racking up events and facts which were downplayed or suppressed by Zionist historians, in order to define the causes of the current situation. Accordingly, Segev uses a variety of sources, such as letters, diaries and interviews as well as Israel's official archives, and lets them speak for themselves. The most interesting fact is that he achieves to highlight the causes of the war not only through political and strategic facts but also through an analysis of Israel's psyche before and during the war.