While the United States revise their troop withdrawal plans from Afghanistan, the future of the country remains precarious. Violence still flourishes on the ground, the Afghan government seems unstable in contrast with the Taliban movement which looks stronger than ever, and, at the same time, al Qaeda tries to rebuild its presence in the region by opening the way for young Islamic extremists to join. In the meantime, thousands of Afghan refugees leave their country and enter Europe, while others, living in Pakistan, are being forced to return to their homeland.

The 2015 National Security Strategy states that the United States will face world’s complex challenges with “strategic patience”. As the United States has been stepping back from the Middle East and pivoting to the Far East, the current article examines how the doctrine of strategic patience is exercised in practice, and presents the risks that this policy is running through.

Iran has consistently attempted to portray the Arab spring as an "Islamic Awakening" and a continuation of its own Iranian revolution of 1979, in an attempt to further its main goal, the consolidation of its role as regional power. By choosing to ignore the clearly political, and not religious, context of the Arab uprisings, Iran has failed to mobilize the Muslim world under its wing. Its goal of achieving a "leader" status in the region, could be threatened even more by the risk of failure of the ongoing nuclear talks, and also by the menacing presence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

As the United States has been undertaking an air strike campaign in Iraq and Syria for several weeks, the familiar question in US foreign policy debates reappeared: can airpower alone do the job? Wrong questions, though, lead to wrong answers. Too much focus on military means and ways results in the tacticization of strategy and the neglect of the political context. The United States should strive to defeat the Islamic State strategically, employing military force if necessary, but not by force alone, because weapons can win battles but cannot win wars.

During most of its modern history, Egypt seemed to follow a more or less similar path in its foreign policy: it would align with one major power after another and would thus gain an advantageous position in the region. During the past two centuries, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States have replaced one another in more or less the same role. Amid the “new Cold War” trend being covered lately in the international press and Sisi’s recent visit to Moscow where he signed the first arms deal with Russia since the 1960’s, many have begun speaking of a renewal of the strategic relationship between the two countries and a consequent chill between Cairo and Washington.

US President Barack Obama’s announcement regarding the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan has necessitated a reshuffling of the geostrategic relations of neighbouring countries in the region. The decision to hand security management back to Afghan authorities has raised questions concerning the stability of the country after the withdrawal of US troops. Afghanistan, Pakistan and India are now compelled to re-evaluate their policies towards each other.

Experiencing a fast economic growth for approximately the past thirty years, China has in the last decade felt strong enough to play a much more active role compared to the recent past. Amid a debate regarding whether China will or will not be the next superpower challenging the US global hegemony, the Middle East is considered as among the first regions the potential Sino-American rivalry will take place. However, despite the truth such scenarios entail, reality is arguably more complex, especially in the now changing socio-political landscape of the Middle East.

The Libyan Arab Spring led to the inauguration of a new chapter in the country's history. What is most challenging in the foreseeable future is who is going to be the leading player of the transitional process or else who is going to set the hierarchy of needs in the Libyan state in order to prevent further confrontation and polarization. The rule of law and democratic principles cannot be instilled into Libyan people overnight. Tremendous effort is needed in order to fulfil “the responsibility to protect the civilians”.

After nine months of protes ts, escalating violenc e, and an es timated 5 ,0 0 0 civilian deaths, it appears that government and anti-regime forc es have reac hed a s talemate. T hough on the brink of a “slow motion collapse”, the Assad regime is determined to remain in power, and will continue its bloody campaign agains t dissenters at all cos ts. In the interes t of s tability and the regional balanc e of power, the United S tates and the international community have several potential polic y options to address the growing turmoil. T he urgenc y of the situation grows daily, as ac tors settle in for a “long winter of Arab discontent”, amids t signs of an emerging civil war.

“It is quite common to hear high officials in Washington and elsewhere speak of c hanging the map of the Middle E as t, as if ancient societies and myriad peoples can be shaken up like so many peanuts in a jar”, says Edward Said in Orientalism. T he lates t threats for the region are –no surprise- direc ted agains t Iran and with US elec tions fas t approac hing the various candidates are busy in talking themselves into a possible US -backed Is raeli s trike. In case this psyc hological warfare leads to war, a Global Armageddon Sc enario could be in the offing.