Search the archive.

The Middle East has long been one of the most unstable regions in the world, and there are no present prospects for change in the near future. This instability is the result of ongoing conflicts and tensions, and a variety of political tensions and divisions. It also, however, is the result of a wide variety of long-term pressures growing out of poor governance, corruption, economic failures, demographic pressures and other forces within the civil sector.

A little more than a decade after the Arab Spring swept away many autocratic regimes in the Middle East and plunged others into chaos, a new authoritarian order is settling over the region. Egypt and Tunisia, the first two countries to rid themselves of longtime dictators in 2011, have weathered coups that pulled them back toward authoritarianism. Sudan, which had to wait until 2018 for its revolution to succeed, has also seen its once-promising transition to democracy derailed by a coup. Meanwhile, Iran has expanded its sphere of influence across the Middle East, especially in Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen, while China, Russia, Turkey, and the Gulf states have increased their sway over many of the region’s weakest states. Thanks in part to these trends, President Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime in Syria is being quietly eased back into the Arab fold.

This is partly a story of authoritarian backlash. Alarmed by unprecedented scenes of citizens taking to the streets to demand their rights, the autocratic regimes that survived the first wave of the Arab Spring cracked down on those who joined pro-democracy protests and offered handouts to win over those who were considering doing so. Bahrain’s promises of jobs and pay raises in early 2011 and subsequent assault on demonstrators in Manama—aided by troops from Saudi Arabia—was the first example of this approach. It was followed by far more brutal crackdowns that ended in civil conflicts in Libya, Syria, and Yemen, and a mix of repression and co-optation in other countries that saw minor protest movements, such as Jordan and Morocco. Later, authoritarian leaders would claw back power in Egypt, Sudan, and Tunisia.

This paper assessed the implications of Iranian nuclear deal on the politics of Middle East from the realist theoretical perspective. Data for the paper were generated from secondary sources such as books, journals, newspapers/magazines, and online materials among others. The contents of these secondary data were qualitatively analyzed. The results of this analytical discourse reveal that the deal means more of co-operation is likely to take place in the Middle East even though Iran is still perceived as a potential threat. Also, the eventual deal means the emergence of a more empowered Iran capable of dominating the region and pursuing her interests at the expense of other states. It further showed that the tendency of Iran pursuing regional hegemony is very high. The paper concludes that Iranian nuclear crisis is an indication that the intention for nuclear armament is not yet over. Based on these findings and conclusion drawn, the paper recommended that the security balance of the Middle East must be maintained in order not to experience a sudden collapse of peace and stability in the region. States in the region must be made to realize the dangers of taking measures that could lead to a race for arms, especially nuclear armament.

Iran’s long-simmering proxy war with the U.S. and Israel is quickly heating up, and it’s forcing the Pentagon to shift more naval and air assets to the Middle East as a deterrent.

Tehran-backed militias have launched a string of attacks on American bases in northern Syria since late March, killing one U.S. contractor and leaving at least six others with traumatic brain injuries. The Palestinian militant group Hamas and other Iranian proxies fired missiles into Israel this month in a coordinated strike from three separate borders — Lebanon, Syria, and the Gaza Strip.

Rising inflation has once again become a primary concern for policy makers, markets, and the general public in advanced economies. The aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic was marked by increasing energy prices, and was further exacerbated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the same time, many countries have committed to de-carbonize their economies, giving rise to concerns around the economic consequences of the climate transition, in particular regarding inflation. In 2021, Larry Fink, CEO of Black Rock made headlines by predicting that policies against climate change would fuel global inflation.1 The European Central Bank (ECB) emphasized the consequences of climate change in its strategy review (see ECB 2021) and acknowledged that it could be forced to take “Greenflation”, that is, inflationary pressure arising from climate policies, into account in monetary policy operations (Schnabel 2022).

The uncertainty surrounding the economic effects of climate mitigation policies such as carbon taxes illustrates that they remain poorly understood. This paper attempts to shed light on the inflationary consequences of climate policy. We study whether past carbon taxes contributed to inflation, by drawing on a comprehensive set of carbon taxes and estimating dynamic impulse responses.

One of the more interesting aspects of the migration towards renewable energy is that many assume that the goal is to eliminate fossil fuels. That is patently impossible, as there will always be a need for more and more energy in a developing world. The key is to create the best balance of energy sources and allocate them to the loads they are best suited to serve.

Frankly, there will never be enough energy. A recent article by Kevin Bullis in Technology Review recently pointed out, the US Energy Information Administration recently posted the Annual Energy Outlook 2016 Reference case projections, which reflect that the percentage of fossil fuel use will only decline to 76.6% by 2040, even with all the alternative energy coming into the grid.

Even as Biden Pushes Clean Energy, He Seeks More Oil Production

President Biden acknowledged “it seems like an irony” that he is asking energy-rich nations to boost oil production as he implores the world to tackle climate change.

The Middle East has by far the lowest share of clean power in its electricity mix of all regions, but is starting to change that through hefty increases in renewable energy generation capacity.

Middle East renewables capacity jumped by 12.8% in 2022 from the year before, the biggest gain in percentage terms of any region last year, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).

Historically a region that has relied heavily on its vast reserves of oil and gas, the Middle East, is fast becoming a leader in renewable energy.

Clean energy capacity in the region doubled between 2010 and 2020 to 40GW, with this figure set to double again by 2024.

After Russia’s February 24, 2022, re-invasion of Ukraine, all eyes turned to the brutal spectacle of Europe’s largest war since 1945. Yet, Russia’s ill-fated attempt to assert its sphere of influence in Europe has not been confined to a single battlefield. The Ukraine war continues to be embedded in a broader hybrid war Russia has waged on the West through energy blackmail, disinformation, covert tactics, and direct military confrontation.[1] One of the key battlefields: Russia’s energy war on Europe.

While the situation remains dynamic, at the start of 2023, it appears that Russia has lost its energy war on Europe. Within a year, Europe has substantially reduced its dependency on Russian fossil fuels, while prices, which quadrupled at the outset of the war, fell back to pre-war levels. Not only has Russia’s energy war on Europe been unsuccessful, but it may have the unintended consequence of accelerating Europe’s energy transition over the long term. Attempting to win recognition as Putin the Great by uniting the Slavic lands of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin may be hailed instead as Putin the Green, the man who convinced Europe to give up dependence on fossil fuels.

The United States is in the early days of a global clean energy revolution. The question facing New Jersey is whether we want to lead, follow, or be left behind while other states in our region capture the extraordinary economic, environmental, and energy benefits from renewable energy.

The clean energy transition is inevitable – yes, inevitable. And not because of any political or ideological perspective. We’re already experiencing the realities of climate change in our day-to-day lives. We have no choice but to develop scalable, affordable, reliable alternatives to oil, gas, and coal because fossil fuels are steadily becoming more expensive, less reliable, and likelier to drive geopolitical instability.

I’ve rarely felt more trepidation about writing a column than this one. But here goes: After more than a century of almost continual growth, the world’s appetite for oil is peaking, and will soon enter terminal decline.

That’s hard to write, because those who’ve called a top in oil have a forecasting record on a par with film producer Harry Warner’s skepticism that people in the 1920s wanted to see talking pictures.

A government research report produced by Finland warns that the increasingly unsustainable economics of the oil industry could derail the global financial system within the next few years.

The new report is published by the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK), which operates under the government’s Ministry of Economic Affairs. GTK is currently the European Commission’s lead coordinator of the EU’s ProMine project, its flagship mineral resources database and modeling system.

Oil prices fell by around $3 a barrel on Monday after analysts highlighted rising global supplies and concerns about demand growth just ahead of key inflation data and a U.S. Federal Reserve meeting later this week.

Brent crude futures fell $2.95, or 3.9%, to settle at $71.84 a barrel, their lowest since Dec. 2021.U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude fell $3.05, or 4.4%, to settle at $67.12 a barrel.

NEW YORK, June 27 (Reuters) - Oil prices slumped over 2% on Tuesday on signals that central banks may not be done with interest rate hikes, while industry data showed lower U.S. crude and gasoline inventories during the peak summer driving season.

Brent crude futures settled down $1.92, or 2.6%, at $72.26 a barrel. U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures dropped $1.67, or 2.4%, to $67.70.

HOUSTON, July 17 (Reuters) - Oil dropped by more than 1.5% on Monday after weaker than expected Chinese economic growth raised doubts over the strength of demand in the world's second biggest oil consumer, and a partial restart of halted Libyan output also pressured prices.

China's gross domestic product (GDP) grew 6.3% year-on-year in the second quarter, compared with analyst forecasts of 7.3%, as its post-pandemic recovery lost momentum.

Oil prices declined on Monday ahead of a US Federal Reserve meeting as investors tried to gauge the central bank’s appetite for further rate hikes, while concerns about China’s fuel demand growth and rising Russian crude supply weighed on the market.

Brent crude futures fell 89 cents, or 1.19 percent, to $73.90 a barrel by 9:23 a.m. Saudi time. US West Texas Intermediate crude was at $69.33 a barrel, also down 1.20 percent.

Oil prices slipped on Thursday as concerns about energy demand weighed against recent promises from Russia and Saudi Arabia to lower production.

Saudi Arabia and Russia, two of the world’s biggest producers of crude, tried to goose prices at the start of the week by announcing an extension of their voluntary output cuts. That comes on top of other pledges from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to reduce global oil supply.

Oil prices settled down 1% on Monday as worries about a slowing global economy and possible U.S. interest-rate hikes outweighed supply cuts announced for August by top exporters Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Brent crude futures settled down 1%, or 76 cents, at $74.65 a barrel while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude settled down 1.2%, or 85 cents, to $69.79.

The boom in US production has made America the largest oil producer in the world and radically changed the economics from when it was a net consumer. It also means this latest oil price plunge will be far more damaging to the US economy than the massive oil price drops in 2008 or 1991.

Early Monday, Morgan Stanley put out an estimate saying if oil prices remain at low levels, it could shave 0.15 to 0.35 percentage points off of US gross domestic product in the first quarter. Morgan Stanley also said it is concerned that consumers won’t spend any of the savings from lower gas prices.