Following the Arab Spring in 2011, Yemen’s devastating conflicts have deepened even further, leading the country to be the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. Despite the international community's multiple attempts to resolve this conflict, the conflict seems to have reached a stalemate. To make matters worse, resolving the conflict is made difficult by the large number of parties involved, internally and externally, and by the complex, dual and fluid nature of the relationships they share. Although the media and international community's focus is directed towards the binary conflict between the Hadi government and Saudi Arabia on one side and Iran and the Houthis on the other, the conflict is greatly multifaceted and far from being binary. This paper critically analyzes and explores other participating actors to comprehend the root causes of the conflict entirely. Although this conflict has been advertised as a proxy war, while others trace back the motivation to sectarianism, this paper argues how this analysis can be misleading and hindering the peace process.

This study reviews the challenges and opportunities encountered by Qatar because of the blockade imposed by the neighboring countries, namely Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, and Egypt. It endeavors to highlight potential scenarios of the crisis. This paper employs a secondary source of information to achieve the objectives, such as books, articles, reports, and academic research, which were later subjected to thematic analysis. The findings of this research reveal that crisis management was an effective strategy implemented by the Qatari Government. It helped Qatari officials to change and transfer the negative impacts to a positive force. The crisis management strategy encouraged Qatar to rely on their local industries, improve education and media institutes, and use Qatar’s soft power internationally. Although 2017 was a challenging year for Qatar due to the crisis, yet the national economy showed an accelerated growth of 5% in the second half of the same year.

In Syria, there is not expected to break out of the revolution of this magnitude. Most people of Syria before others did not expect that the revolution breaks out originally because the regime governs Syria in an oppressive security manner. The regime controls the situation that making it difficult of any popular movement. Political life is not existent in the country. There are no civil society organizations and trade unions are not real and not real parties or political groupings, making it difficult with the outbreak of the revolution in the country in such a dictatorship, security control, which controls everything in people's lives. So Syria was apparently outside the US and global thinking. It has been stated by some officials in America and has had their expectations outbreak of the revolution in Syria minimal because the global system was not ready to abandon the Assad regime because the regime is better for them. However, the revolution in Syria broke out, caught and swept across the country, confusing international systems that were not planning to substitute for the Syrian regime. The Syrian regime is no doubt that one of the major hubs in the region.

This article seeks to explore the conflict between Samsung and Apple. The conflict has been one of the most outstanding patent wars in the history of the smartphone industry. Apple and Samsung are among the most popular manufacturers of commonly used smartphones and tablets. The conflict began when Apple decided to file a federal lawsuit in the US district court, accusing Samsung of copying some of its iPhone features in the Samsung Galaxy S II smartphone. The court ascertained that the gadget had similar characteristics to Apple, thus ordering Samsung to pay Apple for the damages. In response, Samsung reacted by filing countersuits. The two firms, almost fifty cases in different nations and regions. The issues lasted for seven years, starting from 2011 and ending in 2016, in which both companies benefited and lost at the same time. The conflict emanated because of each firm pursuing its competitive advantage in the market. Apart from following market shares, third parties, like consumers, instigated the conflict, with international politics and the media playing a role.

The participation of private and military contractors in armed conflicts is the contemporary phenomenon that concerned policymakers and military strategists, particularly Russian contractors. This phenomenon attracts most politicians to set up initiatives and to draw international guidelines to all concerned parties. The purpose of this research paper is to investigate the condition of Russian private military and security companies (PMSCs) in recent armed conflicts. The research is based on the realism approach, which will help explain Russian state behavior towards PMSCs, while the neoliberalism approach will help to explore this phenomenon from the Russian economic perspective. This research applies inductive, exploratory, and qualitative approaches, which solely based on secondary resources and media contents. The main finding of this research shows that those contractors have obligations under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), but the only limitation is the state’s obligation to endorse them.  Besides, it seems that an international treaty between countries could be a practical step towards having a useful regulatory framework.