The forthcoming presidential elections in the United States are possibly the most crucial of the last decades. As the presidency of the extremely popular Barack Obama is coming to its end, the presidential candidates are going to extremes. Whilst the Democratic Party is proposing its most “socialist” candidate in years, the Republican Party participates in a festival of xenophobia and bigotry with aggressive international policies outside the United States and dangerous immigration policies inside them. But what if the next U.S. president is a Republican? What would be the implications on the political situation in the Middle East and the Muslims within the U.S.?

In the last decade and a half, most analysts argue that the Russo-Iranian relation is primarily driven by external factors, particularly their desire to counter the US hegemony in the broader region, rather than the bilateral relations. Seen under the prism of a zero-sum game, the rapprochement of Tehran with the West brings many analysts to re-evaluate and question the Russian-Iranian ties. The arguments seem to lean towards Iran shunning Russia, disregarding multiple crucial factors related to the Iranian domestic political scene, their collaboration in Syria and even in the Caucasus. Despite the limitations and the ‘watchfulness’ between Moscow and the Islamic Republic, these factors will hinder any serious regression in their cooperation in the near future.

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.