« Previous |
1 - 100 of 131
|
Next »
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. IMPLICATIONS OF THE SAUDI-IRAN DEAL FOR YEMEN
- Author:
- Marta Furlan
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Political Violence @ A Glance
- Abstract:
- In 2014, the Houthis, a Zaydi Shia armed group from the Sa’ada region of northern Yemen, aligned with former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who had been removed following the Arab Spring uprisings. Together, they defeated the government led by President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi, and established control over the Yemeni capital of Sana’a and the entirety of northern Yemen. At that time, Iran began to progressively increase its support for the Houthis, seeing partnership with the group as an opportunity to advance its revisionist agenda in the region and establish its influence in the southern Red Sea, an area of immense strategic significance. Threatened by aggressive Iranian expansionism at its doorstep, in March 2015, Saudi Arabia entered the war alongside Hadi. As Iran sided with the Houthis and Saudi Arabia sided with Hadi, Yemen became the battlefield of both a domestic competition for power between different local factions and a regional competition for influence between Teheran and Riyadh.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Syrian War, Houthis, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Syria
3. The Foreign Policy of Post-Revolutionary Iran: Expediency at the Crossroad of Suprra-Nationalism and Soverignty
- Author:
- Hamoon Khelghat-Doost
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
- Institution:
- Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
- Abstract:
- The direction of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policy has been a source of argument among scholars since the establishment of the revolutionary regime in 1979. Iran’s foreign policy just like its revolution is still a mystery to many researchers as it is difficult to find an appropriate theoretical framework for it. Revolution and how revolutionary states such as China and Cuba view the world and build their foreign relations with other nations have been long discussed in the works of prominent scholars including Leng (1972), Armstrong (1993), Walt (1996), Halliday (2002), and Doma-Nguez & Domínguez (2009). However, what makes the foreign policy of revolutionary Iran different from other revolutionary states (mostly Marxist revolutions) and, therefore, more confusing to study, is the Shi’a Islamic nature of it.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
4. De-escalation Efforts: What Tehran wants from a prisoner swap deal with Washington?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- US National Security Council Spokesperson Adrienne Waston, in a statement on August 10, 2023, affirmed that Iran has released from prison five Americans who were detained and has placed them on house arrest. US citizens Siamak Namazi, Morad Tahbaz, Emad Shargi, and two others were released from Tehran’s notorious Evin prison to house arrest. The US official described their release as “an encouraging step” and stressed that Washigton will continue efforts to bring them “all back home in the United States.”
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
5. A Bid to Contain Pressure: What are the motives behind Iranian President's East Africa tour?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi went on a trip to Africa from July 11 to 13, 2023, during which he visited Kenya, Uganda, and Zimbabwe on invitations from the leaders of the three countries, President William Ruto, Yoweri Museveni and President Emmerson Mnangagwa, respectively. Raisi led a high-level delegation including First Vice President Mohammad Mokhber, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, Health Minister Behrouz Aghaei, and Minister of Agriculture Seyyed Javad Sadati Nejad, and several other high-ranking officials and businessmen.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Treaties and Agreements, Partnerships, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Uganda, Kenya, Iran, Middle East, Zimbabwe, and East Africa
6. The Israeli ThreatL What is driving the renewed escalation between Iran and Azerbaijan?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 05-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- The Ministry of Interior, Security Agency, and Prosecutor General’s Office of Azerbaijan announced in a joint statement on Tuesday, May 16, 2023, that nine individuals were arrested on charges of planning to overthrow the government by force, assassinate prominent figures and senior Azerbaijani officials. The statement indicated that they had connections to Iranian intelligence agencies, and that the cell was composed of a person named Ruhollah Akhoundzadeh and his son Mursal, along with seven others working under his supervision. On his part, the spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nasser Kanaani, rejected the accusations in a statement on May 18, denying any official or unofficial relationship between these individuals and Iran. He affirmed that imprisoning individuals on the pretext of their connection to Iran is unacceptable.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, and Escalation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Azerbaijan
7. Encircling Damascus: Iran’s Foreign Minister Visits Lebanon, Syria, and Turkey
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 01-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- Iranian Foreign Minister, Hossein Amirabdollahian, has made a surprise visit to Ankara, Beirut, and Damascus, reflecting his country’s increased engagement in the region. His trip to Ankara replaced a postponed trip to Moscow, where he was set to meet with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Syrian War, Engagement, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Lebanon, and Syria
8. Bankrupting Iran’s Empire of Terror
- Author:
- Nate Sibley
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- Hamas’s surprise attack on Israel has left thousands of innocent people dead, set the stage for a bloody and protracted conflict in Gaza, and precipitated a crisis that threatens to engulf the Middle East in a devastating new conflict. To prevent further escalation, the United States needs to act swiftly to intensify economic pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran and dismantle its terrorist financing networks. Though Iran has denied any involvement, Hamas could not have planned an operation of this scale without critical support from its chief state sponsor. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has devoted enormous resources to building up proxy terrorist organizations in order to encircle Israel. According to a 2020 US government estimate, the IRGC provides as much as $700 million to Lebanese Hezbollah and $100 million to Hamas and other Palestinian groups each year. So far, this strategy appears to be working. Hezbollah, the IRGC’s most powerful terrorist partner, is poised to attack from the north, while other Iranian proxies threaten Israel from within Syria and elsewhere. Israel’s newly cordial relations with its Arab neighbors—including its nascent détente with Saudi Arabia—hang precariously in the balance. President Joe Biden’s immediate response to the attacks rightly focused on delivering Israel the political backing and military assistance that it urgently needs. But as the overseer of the global financial system, the United States can also deploy its unique capabilities to constrict the Islamic Republic’s revenues and shut down its global terrorist financing networks. Whether the United States succeeds in doing so will shape events far beyond the Middle East. This conflict is not just another flare-up in a long-troubled region. It reflects an ongoing global realignment wherein powerful adversaries test American strength and resolve with growing coordination and assertiveness. As Russia wages war in Ukraine and Beijing watches carefully, the stakes call for nothing less than a major US endeavor to bankrupt the Islamic Republic’s empire of terror once and for all.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Corruption, Terrorism, and Hamas
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
9. The System Is Blinking Red over Iran
- Author:
- Jonathan Schachter
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- In his testimony to the 9/11 Commission, then-CIA Director George Tenet described the harrowing intelligence picture that had emerged in the summer of 2001. “The system was blinking red,” he famously recalled. What followed, of course, was the well-documented, multi-agency failure to prevent an avoidable disaster that changed the course of history. The system is blinking red again, and the American response appears frighteningly familiar. Earlier this month, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that its inspectors in Iran had discovered uranium particles enriched to about 84 percent purity. Most reports have noted that this is just shy of the 90 percent level generally considered to be “weapons grade.” Others correctly point out that uranium enriched to around 80 percent fueled the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. Almost no one mentions that Iran has no civilian need to enrich uranium in the first place. During the nearly four years leading up to the IAEA’s finding, Iran has engaged in increasingly grave violations of its international nuclear obligations, only some of which derive from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Iran still refuses to cooperate with at least three separate IAEA investigations of undeclared nuclear materials, activities, and sites, in violation of its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. With Iran’s long history of nuclear lawbreaking, the discovery of undeclared, highly enriched uranium is unsurprising. Iran does not have a peaceful uranium enrichment program. Uranium enrichment remains part and parcel of the regime’s effort to develop and maintain the ability to produce and deliver nuclear weapons on demand. Rather than dismantling Iran’s illegally built military enrichment program, the JCPOA decriminalized it. Even if the US had not withdrawn from the JCPOA in 2018, the deal’s limited and temporary terms explicitly permit Iran to expand its enrichment capability and capacity and increase its stockpile of enriched uranium, legally and without limitation, by the end of this decade. In a February 24 interview with CBS News, the current CIA director, William Burns, downplayed the danger. He reaffirmed that “we don’t believe that the Supreme Leader in Iran has yet made a decision to resume the weaponization program that we judge that they suspended or stopped at the end of 2003.” The materials Israeli intelligence spirited out of a Tehran warehouse (the “Atomic Archive”) in 2018, which Israel shared with the United States, raise disturbing questions about the assessment Burns presented and its persistence. The archive materials showed that the regime did not stop or suspend its weaponization program in 2003, but, in the Iranians’ own words, modified it. What had been a crash program geared toward testing a nuclear device on a short timeline became a dispersed, long-term effort—part clandestine, part under the cover of civilian research—to develop and maintain capabilities relevant to the production of nuclear weapons. The program went from sprint to marathon, though both have a nuclear weapons finish line. More broadly, the archive showed that the Iranian nuclear weapons program was more advanced and comprehensive than previously understood. Israel and the United States became aware of how much so 15 years after the fact and only thanks to one of the most stunning intelligence coups in modern history. Despite this long lag and the long odds of repeating such an intelligence feat, Burns seems to believe that we will know in near-real time if and when Iran’s leader decides to switch the program back to an even shorter nuclear sprint. This belief seems to reflect, as the saying goes, the triumph of hope over experience. Perhaps this too is unsurprising. The JCPOA was always built on little more than hope. The largely unspoken logic behind the agreement was that an engaged, wealthier Iran would lose interest in nuclear weapons before the deal’s restrictions expired. Iran quickly proved the optimists wrong. In the years immediately after striking the deal, Tehran increased defense spending by more than 30 percent; offered substantially more support to terrorist groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis; and intensified its aggression across the region. Iran continues to develop missiles and, as Burns pointed out, the associated ability to deliver a nuclear warhead. Now Iran is using the same uranium enrichment infrastructure guaranteed by the JCPOA to violate its terms. The Biden administration’s policy toward Iran reflects a clear and consistent preference for diplomacy over the use of force, and understandably so. But the White House treats the two as contradictory, rather than complementary. For over two years, the administration has demonstrated its reticence to use, or even credibly threaten to use, force against Iran. Manifestly undeterred, Iran has continued and accelerated its drive toward the nuclear threshold. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine and Iran’s provision of weapons to Russia mean that even if the IAEA Board of Governors were to refer Iran’s nuclear crimes to the United Nations Security Council, Russia surely would veto any punitive measure toward the Islamic Republic. In other words, America’s soft-handed approach and global events are making a diplomatic solution less likely. If Washington continues on its current path, the world almost certainly will face a nuclear-armed Iran, a war to prevent that eventuality, or both. It is not too late to act. First, the United States can press its European partners to activate the JCPOA’s snap-back mechanism, which is not subject to a Russian (or Chinese) veto. Doing so would reimpose international sanctions and the UN arms embargo on Iran that the deal lifted in 2020. It also would prevent the planned lifting of the UN missile embargo on Iran in October of this year. Second, the president, his administration, and Congress can make clear that the United States and its allies can and will use force to prevent Iran from violating its nuclear obligations. The United States would not be moving its red lines, but rather enforcing them. Doing so would send a powerful message to Iranian leaders that they have already crossed America’s red lines and need to back down. Such a threat might not be effective. But without a credible American commitment to use force, no diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear problem is possible. This moment could be America’s last chance to change course on Iran. If it does not, one wonders what Director Burns and his colleagues in the administration might say in their future testimony about why they failed to act when the system was blinking red on their watch.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, National Security, Nuclear Weapons, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
10. Strength in Unity: A Sustainable US-Led Regional Security Construct in the Middle East
- Author:
- Robert Greenway
- Publication Date:
- 08-2023
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- China and Russia are exploiting US indifference toward the Middle East and efforts to integrate Iran into the region, threatening regional stability, Israel’s security, and global markets. The convergence of threats encompasses an Iranian nuclear threshold state controlling a constellation of terrorist groups, resurgent non-state terrorist groups including ISIS and al-Qaeda, and Russian and Chinese exploitation of receding American presence. We are reaching an inflection point at which the United States risks the irrevocable loss of a favorable balance of both trade and forces, resulting in instability that will threaten our vital interests and the global economy. This constitutes an unprecedented range of challenges beyond our capacity, and the capacity of our partners and allies, to address threats to global energy and trade as we struggle to recover from a global pandemic. We have not faced a similar period of risk in the Middle East since the turmoil following the Iranian Revolution, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and storming of the Grand Mosque in 1979. The US shares vital national security interests with longtime partners in the region and, as a result, they prefer US leadership in both the economic and security domains. A sustainable US-led regional security construct in the Middle East that includes effective partners based on convergent interests is the most efficient way to address the unacceptable risk, which results from the disconnect between the vital national interests of the US and its partners and the resources both have committed. A constellation of mutually beneficial trade relationships providing both the resources and rationale for a regional security construct would strengthen such an arrangement.1 Establishing a US-led enduring regional security architecture comprised of more capable partners and allies is the most effective way for the United States to safeguard our vital national security interests in the Middle East. This architecture would provide five key benefits: Secure our vital interests. The US and global economies depend on the uninterrupted flow of energy from and trade through the Middle East, which remains a vital national security interest. Compete with China. China depends on the Middle East for energy to sustain its economy and military. Beijing is exploiting the vacuum created by US indifference to securing the Middle East. Manage risk and uncertainty. Threats in the region are approaching a quantitative military advantage over America’s partners, which creates unacceptable risk to US interests. Leverage our relationships. We retain advantages in the long-term diplomatic, economic, and security relationships that we have derived from convergent interests with partners. Build on a sound foundation. Historic efforts to build collective security constructs, many of which have occurred within the Middle East, provide valuable lessons.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Non State Actors, Strategic Competition, and Regional Security
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Iran, and Middle East
11. The Transition from Nationalism to Islamism in Iran’s Foreign Policy
- Author:
- M. Reza Pashayi and Timuçin Kodaman
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- AURUM Journal of Social Sciences
- Institution:
- Altinbas University
- Abstract:
- The 1979 Iranian Revolution is a multifaceted phenomenon with intricate causes, complex evolution and far-reaching outcomes. Rooted in the Constitutional Revolution of the early 20th century and the rise to power of the Ayatollahs, its beginnings are distinct but interconnected. Unlike many revolutions of the 20th century, the 1979 Iranian Revolution was a departure from the socialist or communist model and manifested itself as a revolt against both Western and Eastern systems, with unique outcomes. The 1979 Revolution shook a traditional and established order and paved the way for the rise of Islamism within a new political framework. This ideology, like its predecessors, adopted a singular leadership based on religious doctrine. To differentiate itself from global and regional powers and focus on its unique revolution, the Iranian regime shaped a foreign policy summarized by the slogan “neither East nor West, the Islamic Republic” and aimed to export this ideology globally. The policy focused primarily on political and ideological interests, resulting in permanent sanctions imposed by the United States. This economic aspect contributes to the changes in Iran’s foreign policy towards the United States, from pre-revolutionary Persian nationalism to post-Revolutionary political Islam, emphasizing its strength and adaptability in the face of external pressures.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, History, Shiism, and Iranian Revolution
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
12. An Heir and a Spare? How Yemen’s “Southern Hezbollah” Could Change Iran’s Deterrent Calculus
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 12-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Since October 27, the Houthis have launched three medium-range ballistic missiles at Israel, a first since Saddam Hussein fired Scud missiles into the country in 1991. The Yemen-based jihadists have also launched at least eight salvos of cruise missiles and long-range explosive drones focused on the southern port of Eilat. Moreover, they have attacked U.S. assets directly during the Hamas-Israel war, shooting down one MQ-9 Reaper drone and routing numerous missiles near Navy vessels. If Iran continues to develop the group’s capabilities, the Houthis may provide the broader “axis of resistance” with a potent new chess piece. In this timely Policy Note, Michael Knights assesses the rising Houthi threat and explains how the United States and its allies can respond more assertively and effectively. A revamped policy would recognize the intimate alliance between the Houthis and Iran—which has never been a “marriage of convenience,” as some analysts have imagined—and seek to counter the group’s aggression with the goal of securing U.S. interests and providing a better future for the Yemeni people.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Deterrence, and Houthis
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
13. The Regent of Allah: Ali Khamenei's Political Evolution in Iran
- Author:
- Mehdi Khalaji
- Publication Date:
- 07-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- During his lengthy tenure as Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei has shown a knack for consolidating power by creating layers of bureaucracy in military, economic, and religious affairs. In turn, he has liberally purged officials who have hinted at disloyalty to him, the Islamic Republic, or its governing doctrine, velayat-e faqih (rule of the jurisprudent). But Khamenei does not lack for personal complexity. As a younger man, he dressed casually, flaunted his love of literature, and composed poetry. And as a leader, he has often demonstrated flexibility—coined as “heroic flexibility” in the case of the 2015 nuclear deal—at times of national risk or strained social cohesion. He has likewise blessed the rise of relatively moderate presidents such as Mohammad Khatami and Hassan Rouhani when he thought their leadership would reinforce national stability. In this wide-ranging study, former Qom theologian Mehdi Khalaji details Khamenei’s political ascent, from his role as an influential cleric in Mashhad to his presidency under Ruhollah Khomeini and his surprising appointment as Supreme Leader. Whoever succeeds him, the author makes plain, will inherit an infrastructure designed to preserve Iran’s authoritarian system and suppress rumblings of internal dissent.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Political Islam, and Ali Khamenei
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
14. Is Iran Looking to Inspire Shia Homegrown Violent Extremist Attacks?
- Author:
- Moustafa Ayad and Matthew Levitt
- Publication Date:
- 06-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- An October 2018 report by the National Counterterrorism Center defined Shia homegrown violent extremists as “individuals who are inspired or influenced by state actors such as Iran, foreign terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, or Shia militant groups but who do not belong to these groups and are not directed by them.” At the time, the prospect of such Shia violence was largely theoretical, and officials could identify no tangible threats on American soil. But the January 2020 targeted killing of Iranian Qods Force commander Qasem Soleimani changed the picture, and U.S. officials could now point to a “catalyzing event,” as envisioned in the NCTC brief. Last year’s attack against writer Salman Rushdie and another at a Las Vegas hotel exemplified how Iran-inspired individuals were motivated to act. In this Policy Note, experts Moustafa Ayad and Matthew Levitt explore lone-offender Shia violence largely through the lens of social media. Closer tracking of online networks, they argue, could illuminate this flourishing virtual activity and how it might lead to real-world harm.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, Violent Extremism, and Shia
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
15. Iran’s Nuclear Endgame Warrants a Change in U.S. Strategy
- Author:
- Michael Singh
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Recently, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency discovered that Iran had enriched uranium to a level just shy of what is generally considered weapons grade. Like many findings before it, this revelation underscores the need for a new U.S. and European policy toward Iran. The two most important and immediate steps in that process are clear by this point: Washington and its partners need to move on from any remaining plans they might have to resurrect the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), namely by activating that accord’s “snapback” mechanism; and governments must heighten their efforts to deter Iran through credible threats of military force.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
16. Striking Back: Iran and the Rise of Asymmetric Drone Warfare in the Middle East
- Author:
- Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr.
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Iranian drone strikes, as exemplified by the September 2019 attack against Saudi Aramco facilities, have jolted Middle East leaders and revealed Tehran’s long-range precision strike capabilities. The regime’s large and growing drone force, which can be used for reconnaissance or strike missions, now poses an existential threat to the Gulf states and a direct threat to Israel, as does its formidable missile force. Moreover, Iranian drones transferred to Russia have had a significant impact on Moscow’s war against Ukraine. In the bigger picture, advances in drone technology have produced an inflection point in aerial warfare—comparable to the introduction of manned flight more than a century ago—that has ended the guarantee of U.S. air superiority over its forces and bases. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. explores the contours and consequences of Iran’s drone activities in this timely Policy Note. To counter the Islamic Republic, the former CENTCOM commander recommends an approach centered on clearer U.S. communication about its goals for the region, tighter collaboration with partners and allies, and enhanced efforts to counter Iran’s drone fleet, along with its ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Drones, Military, and Asymmetric Warfare
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, United States of America, and Gulf Nations
17. Beyond Arms and Ammunition: China, Russia and the Iran Back Channel
- Author:
- Sine Ozkarasahin
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- China Brief
- Institution:
- The Jamestown Foundation
- Abstract:
- Along with Iran’s increasing involvement in supplying Russia’s war effort against Ukraine, a potential increase in Chinese support for Russia presents a challenge for both Kyiv and NATO (Eurasia Daily Monitor, March 6). Indeed, Western governments have recently expressed alarm over China’s potential provision of dual-use or military equipment to Russia (U.S. Department of Defense, February 28). According to U.S. intelligence, Chinese arms transfers to Russia would probably take the form of artillery and drones (Straits Times, February 26). As both items are badly needed by Russia to sustain its war efforts, the entry of Chinese arms on the Ukrainian battlefield may drastically shift the balance of power in the ongoing conflict. However, in addition to trackable military aid packages, Chinese assistance is manifesting itself more subtly in ways that are often overlooked. Consequently, a forthcoming Chinese aid package to Russia is likely to take several forms.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Arms Trade, and Investment
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Iran, Eurasia, Middle East, and Asia
18. The Unfulfilled Promise of EU Foreign and Security Policy towards Iran
- Author:
- Riccardo Alcaro, Steven Blockmans, Akin Unver, and Sine Özkaraşahin
- Publication Date:
- 02-2023
- Content Type:
- Research Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
- Abstract:
- With the 2015 nuclear deal dead in all but name, Iran is getting closer to Russia and more repressive at home, while EU member states’ priorities about the Islamic Republic now extend beyond nuclear proliferation to human rights and European security. This shift in priorities cements a re-orientation of the EU’s approach to Iran from conditional engagement to confrontation. EU member states’ options are limited, however. Pressure worked prior to the nuclear agreement because the EU cut off significant trade with Iran. But US extraterritorial sanctions, re-imposed after the United States left the deal in 2018, have rendered EU-Iran trade so modest that cutting it would have little impact. The EU could get more leverage by providing incentives, yet the political inexpediency of rewarding Iran at a time of rising belligerence of the Islamic Republic greatly restricts the range of benefits potentially on offer. Still, in the mid- to longer term, the EU and its member states will need to combine pressure with some form of incentives if they want to defend their interests in non-proliferation, European security and the protection of human rights in Iran. They also need to resort to a variety of international partnerships in order to maximise their residual leverage.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, and Middle East
19. Iran and the Israel-Hamas War
- Author:
- Alistair Taylor and Alex Vatanka
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- On this week's episode, MEI's Editor in Chief Alistair Taylor talks to Iran Program Director Alex Vatanka about Iran and the Israel-Hamas war. As fighting rages in Gaza and the prospects for regional escalation continue to mount, Iran will remain a critical actor to watch. It is not only Israel’s main regional foe but also the leading provider of military aid and training for Hamas. Given the centrality of Iran in this latest Middle Eastern war, understanding how Tehran views the conflict and its endgame will be critical.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Hamas, Armed Conflict, Escalation, Military Aid, Regional Politics, and October 7
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Gaza
20. Saudi Arabia’s Balancing Game: The Palestinian Cause and Regional Leadership
- Author:
- Giulia Daga and Luigi Simonelli
- Publication Date:
- 11-2023
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- In the hours following Hamas’s violent attack on Israel of 7 October, the Saudi authorities called for “an immediate de-escalation”, while noting that they had previously warned against the outcomes of “the continued occupation and depriving Palestinians of their legitimate rights and the repeated systematic provocations against their sanctities”.[1] In a more recent declaration, the Saudi Foreign Minister has reiterated the country’s “categorical rejection of calls for the forced displacement of the Palestinian people from Gaza, and its condemnation of the continued targeting of defenceless civilians there”.[2] Reportedly, the heavy retaliation measures adopted by Israel, whose bombing campaign against Gaza has been one of the most intense of this century,[3] also including the apparent use of white phosphorus,[4] resulted in the halt of the normalisation process between Saudi Arabia and Israel, which should have followed suit on the 2020 Abraham Accords. Only a few weeks before, on 20 September, the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had announced on US television that “every day, we get closer” to an agreement with Israel.[5] A few days later, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had reiterated the same optimism in front of the United Nations General Assembly general debate, insisting that the Palestinians should not be given “a veto over new peace treaties with Arab states”.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Leadership, Regional Power, and October 7
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia
21. China’s Grand Vision and the Persian Gulf
- Author:
- Anoushiravan Ehteshami
- Publication Date:
- 03-2023
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- China’s engagement with Asian regions beyond its geographical periphery has grown exponentially since the 1990s and this is nowhere more evident than in West Asia and the Persian Gulf subregion. While energy drove China’s early interactions with the Gulf states, within two decades after the Cold War the relationships had evolved into much tighter networks of partnerships. China’s relations with the Gulf states, however, has not been uniform and the case studies of the United Arab Emirates and Iran highlight the complexities of China’s strategy in this subregion and the ways in which it actively pursues its diverse set of interests.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Partnerships, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- China, Iran, Middle East, and Gulf Nations
22. Korea's Economic Presence in Iran under Trump and Its Prospects during the Biden Presidency
- Author:
- Shirzad Azad
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
- Abstract:
- On July 14, 2015, when Iran and the 5+1 group (the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany) ultimately agreed over the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Republic of Korea (ROK) was practically one of the top three trade partners of the Persian Gulf country. In early May 2016 and only a few months after the nuclear deal was carried through, the then Korean President, Park Geun-hye, made an official visit to Iran where the two countries vowed to ratchet up their economic relations from roughly $6 billion to more than $18 billion in the years to come. Accompanied by “the largest business delegation in the history of Korean presidential trips,” Park’s high-profile trip to Iran persuaded many interested experts and observers to believe that the East Asian country was really determined to shore up its economic weight in Iran by drawing certain policies relevant to the long-term presence of Korean businesses in the Middle Eastern country (Choi 2016). Despite all those upbeat expectations about the ROK’s future economic and technological role in Iran, however, various data and statistics coming out indicate that over the past several years nearly all well-known Korean brands and products have increasingly lost their market share in the Mideast country to brands and goods supplied by other competitors. As a matter of fact, in the late 1990s and early 2000s the East Asian nation emerged as one of the Persian Gulf country’s top trading partners in the world, outstripping a number of Tehran’s traditional trading partners from the West. And while Korea managed to even expand its economic presence in Iran in the heydays of sundry international sanctions levied against the Middle Eastern country over its contentious nuclear program a couple of years before the JCPOA was eventually agreed in 2015, the ROK has been doing relatively poor in Iran during the past years (Azad 2018). Such lackadaisical performance, epitomized by abandoning the long-established pattern of significant trade in energy with Iran, has critically influenced a sharp decline in the total volume of two-way commerce between the two countries. While the plummeting share of Korean brands and goods in Iranian markets had indubitably something to do with certain policies pursued by the Moon Jae-in-led Korean government, however, the main culprit turned out to be the Trump administration’s unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal in May 2018. The crippling sanctions which Washington under Trump subsequently imposed on Iran played a pivotal role in reshaping the scope and size of Korean commercial connections to the Persian Gulf country, though some unprecedented diplomatic and political troubles involving Seoul and Tehran during the past years have also had a lot to do with those punitive economic and financial measures targeting the Iranians. How did then the Koreans respond to those unique circumstances rendered largely by Trump’s approach toward the Persian Gulf country? What are going to be the prospects of a Biden administration’s policy shift for Korea’s economic performance in Iran? This study seeks to shed some light on Trump’s Iran policy with regard to Korea, its repercussions for the East Asian nation’s economic relationship with the Middle Eastern country, and potential solutions to chip away at those impediments under a Democrat administration in Washington led by Joe Biden.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economics, Donald Trump, JCPOA, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America
23. Seven Myths about the Iran Nuclear Deal
- Author:
- Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- In 2015, President Barack Obama worked with three European powers, the European Union, Iran, China, and Russia to conclude the Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). In 2018, President Donald Trump formally withdrew the United States from the deal. Instituting his policy of “maximum pressure,” Trump imposed crippling economic sanctions that punished Iran not just for its ongoing nuclear weapons program but also for, among other things, its regional aggression and support for terrorism worldwide. Earlier in 2018, Israeli agents conducted a dramatic operation in Tehran, breaking into a secret warehouse and capturing a trove of Iranian nuclear files. These documents revealed a more advanced and comprehensive nuclear weapons program than had been previously known. The nuclear archive also showed Iranian officials’ plan for concealing nuclear weapons efforts under the guise of civilian research and development, and how Iranian officials systematically deceived the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). As a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran is required to cooperate with IAEA inspectors to verify the peaceful nature of its program. After the Israelis shared the nuclear archive with the IAEA, its inspectors found traces of uranium at several undeclared sites. Despite being obligated to do so, Tehran has refused to explain the presence of the uranium or reveal its current location. Iran’s requirements under the NPT are wholly separate from the JCPOA, but Tehran is using the Biden administration’s profound desire to return to the nuclear deal to bring political pressure on the IAEA to close the book on Iran’s violations. A fair-minded observer of Iran’s relations with the IAEA cannot but conclude that Tehran has never wavered from its intention to build a nuclear weapons capability and that its publicly declared “civilian” nuclear activities are an effort to hide its nuclear bomb program in plain sight. From the very inception of the JCPOA, however, the deal’s supporters have spun myths that disguise these self-evident truths. After Trump left the deal, those same supporters continued to recite the old myths while adding some new ones about the purported comparative advantage of the JCPOA over maximum pressure. As President Biden prepares to bring the United States back into the JCPOA, and as the public, the press, and Congress consider the deal's terms, we identify the seven most pernicious myths and explain the reality that they seek to conceal.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, National Security, Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
24. How to Target Iran’s Kleptocracy
- Author:
- Nate Sibley
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- The death of Mahsa Amini in the custody of Iran’s so-called morality police sparked protests that continue to spread across the country, posing the most serious challenge to Tehran’s theocratic dictatorship in years. The demonstrations have focused on opposing the compulsory wearing of the hijab, but Iranians are also venting anger at a regime that has lost legitimacy after decades of political repression, economic mismanagement, and systemic corruption. Policymakers in the United States are rightly focused on constraining Iran’s nuclear program and state sponsorship of terrorism. Sanctions and other measures targeting the regime’s illicit financial networks tend to reflect these urgent priorities. But Iran’s theocratic regime is also a sprawling, deeply entrenched kleptocracy against which the US should apply more pressure. This brief examines the prevailing forms of corruption within Iran, the implications for US policy, and how the US can intensify efforts to expose and target the regime’s kleptocracy.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Corruption, Human Rights, and Kleptocracy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
25. Los Estados medio-orientales en su competencia por recursos y alianzas en África subsahariana (2000-2021)
- Author:
- Rafael Bustos and Juan Carlos Pastor
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
- Institution:
- Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
- Abstract:
- El artículo explora la importancia antigua y nueva que para estos países de Oriente Medio tiene el continente africano a principios del siglo XXI. Para algunos de ellos es un interés histórico arraigado como es el caso de Egipto y su presencia en Sudán y las fuentes del Nilo, el de Turquía ligado al Imperio otomano o el de Omán, cuya vieja relación se remonta al comercio de esclavos y al control de Zanzíbar desde finales del siglo XVII, mientras que para Arabia Saudí o Irán esa relación data de los años 70 y para Emiratos Árabes Unidos y Catar este interés es mucho más reciente y arranca en el siglo XXI. Intereses que tienen múltiples vectores, entre los que destacan la competencia por la hegemonía regional de Oriente Medio, el prestigio, la intermediación y, en menor medida, pero también la compra de tierras cultivables en suelo africano. Por su parte, Israel, aunque es un actor que tratamos secundariamente, persigue también desde hace poco una agenda propia que resulta claramente distinguible del resto.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Alliance, Rivalry, and Competition
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa
26. The Inflation Weapon: How American Sanctions Harm Iranian Households
- Author:
- Esfandyar Batmanghelidj
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Fourth Freedom Forum
- Abstract:
- This study examines the humanitarian harms of U.S. sanctions on Iranian citizens by focusing on their principal economic impact—high rates of inflation. Although nonexperimental, the study draws upon various data to present a cohesive, if not comprehensive, narrative of the economic shocks that followed the imposition of U.S. sanctions in 2012 and 2018.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Economy, and Inflation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
27. Starr Forum: Republics of Myth: National Narratives and the US-Iran Conflict
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- MIT Center for International Studies
- Abstract:
- Why does the rift between the US and Iran persist? A new book by CIS scholars sheds new light on this longstanding conflict.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
28. The Russian-Iran Partnership in a Multipolar World
- Author:
- Clément Therme
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
- Abstract:
- The strengthening of the partnership between Russia and Iran depends on overlapping security interests; bilaterally, regionally and on the world stage. Tehran has pursued a regional policy program that is largely in line with Russia’s interests, whether these relate to Syria (from 2011), the Caucasus, Central Asia, or Afghanistan (since 1991). This security dimension was already one of the foundations of the bilateral relationship in the post-Cold War-period. It has now appeared in regional dealings between Tehran and Moscow. In addition, the decline of US international predominance, which has been apparent since the 2000s, has allowed Russia and Iran to develop a shared ideological discourse in opposition to “Western values”. Beyond this shared ideological basis, Tehran has developed a true “Realpolitik” whereby it relies on Russian foreign policy to relieve US pressure on Iran that is aimed at regime change or, at the very least, a change in the behavior of the Islamic Republic. In other words, in seeking to preserve intact the main ideological tenets of its regime, Tehran has added a new dimension to its relationship with Moscow. Since 1991, this relationship has become a matter of survival for a regime that faces both popular opposition at home and external pressure from Washington: pressure that increased during the Trump administration of 2017-2021.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, and Multipolarity
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, and Middle East
29. Sanctions Run Amok – The Undermining of U.S. Power
- Author:
- Keith A. Preble
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Fletcher Security Review
- Institution:
- The Fletcher School, Tufts University
- Abstract:
- Well into its second year, the Biden administration has continued to grapple with persistent foreign policy challenges while new ones have emerged: North Korea has not curtailed its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs; negotiations with Iran on resuscitating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) remain stalled; and a Russian troop buildup near Ukraine may signal a potential invasion and full-scale conflict. In confronting these and other challenges, the United States continues to use economic sanctions as a mean of punishing, signaling, and coercing rivals into changing their foreign policy behaviors. As a tool of American economic power, policymakers often see sanctions as “Goldilocks” instruments that are “just right,” albeit ones that require time and patience to facilitate policy change.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, North Korea, North America, and United States of America
30. Three Presidents, Three Flawed Iran Policies, and the Path Ahead
- Author:
- Robert Satloff
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- News reports of a nearing breakthrough in the Iran nuclear talks will trigger sighs of relief, but the deal will likely prove disappointing on many fronts. With Russia’s horrific onslaught against Ukraine, news reports of a likely breakthrough in the Iran nuclear talks will trigger sighs of relief. But sadly, that relief will be misplaced. U.S. negotiators have already admitted that the forthcoming deal will not match the nonproliferation achievements of the 2015 agreement, and no official has even hinted that the revised text will either penalize Iran for its flagrant violation of its commitments or address the range of problems that have emerged since the original deal was reached. In this Policy Note, Washington Institute executive director Robert Satloff delivers a powerful, bipartisan critique, assessing how and why three successive American presidents started their terms with sound ideas on Iran and leverage to advance them but accepted either flawed agreements or America’s own isolation. Looking beyond a new Iran deal, he proposes an urgent agenda: scrupulous enforcement; a renewed push for a “longer, stronger” agreement; early preparation for the day after restrictions expire; close coordination with regional partners to counter Iran’s rising influence; and outreach to the Iranian people, who will see little benefit from the windfall in sanctions relief likely coming to Tehran. American leadership, determination, and resilience, he notes, will be essential.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Negotiation, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
31. Countering Iran's Regional Strategy: A Long-Term, Comprehensive Approach
- Author:
- Eyal Zamir
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- A coordinated response to Iran’s aggression can preserve U.S. and Western interests, reinforce Israel and America’s Arab allies, and promote regional stability. For decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has sought to extend its influence throughout the Middle East, and the threat has only grown more serious amid the regime’s enhanced conventional military capabilities and proximity to a nuclear breakout. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has spearheaded Tehran’s expansionist “four capitals” strategy, focused on Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sanaa. In Iraq, the IRGC works through elements of the government-funded Popular Mobilization Forces; in Syria, through the regime of Bashar al-Assad; in Lebanon, through Hezbollah—which can be regarded as Iran’s “model” proxy; and in Yemen, through the Houthis, who hold territory and oppose the internationally recognized government. In all these places, the IRGC has exploited civil wars and interstate conflicts to spread its political, economic, and military influence. In this Policy Focus, Maj. Gen. Eyal Zamir, IDF, draws on his deep experience in the Israeli military establishment to propose a detailed plan for undermining Iran’s influence in the region—an approach that will preserve U.S. and Western interests, reinforce Israel and America’s Arab allies, and promote regional stability.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Instability, and Regional Security
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Israel
32. The Revolution Will Be Televised in Arabic: Iran's Media Infrastructure Abroad
- Author:
- Hamdi Malik
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- An umbrella entity, the Islamic Radio and Television Union, encompasses more than two hundred media groups stretching from Oman to East Africa. The concept sodoure enqelab, or “export of the revolution,” is written into Iran’s constitution, and the country’s founding leaders wasted no time trying to make it a reality. Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) launched its Arabic Service in 1980 and subsequently leveraged satellite television to intensify its outreach to Arabic-speaking nations—Shia audiences in particular. Today, IRIB World Service runs fourteen satellite TV channels, three internet TV channels, and thirty-two radio stations, a number of them broadcasting in Arabic. In this highly informative Policy Note, expert Hamdi Malik surveys Iran’s remarkable range of Arabic-language media, with a focus on those under the Islamic Radio and Television Union banner, which encompasses more than two hundred entities. Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria feature strongly in the inventory, but more surprising places such as Oman and East Africa also crop up. To combat Tehran’s media infiltration and secure U.S. interests, the author urges Washington to promote a true partnership between Western countries and the region’s many media actors who wish to challenge Iran’s propaganda machine.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Infrastructure, Media, and Propaganda
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
33. Iran's Nuclear Hedging Strategy: Shaping the Islamic Republic's Proliferation Calculus
- Author:
- Michael Eisenstadt
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Tehran’s willingness to pause aspects of its nuclear program may offer opportunities to stoke regime concerns about the potential costs of moving forward. Since halting its crash nuclear weapons program in 2003, the Islamic Republic has pursued a cautious hedging strategy that has enabled it to become an advanced nuclear threshold state, while also avoiding a military confrontation with the United States and Israel. Yet Iran’s willingness to pause aspects of its nuclear program in order to ease pressure—and in turn to pursue more urgent objectives—may help Washington constrain Tehran’s nuclear ambitions by amplifying its concerns about the potential risks and costs of proliferating. In this Policy Focus, military analyst Michael Eisenstadt surveys the evolution of Iran’s nuclear hedging strategy and suggests ways for the United States, along with its allies and partners, to shape the regime’s proliferation calculus with the goal of preventing an Iranian breakout and a nuclearized Middle East.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Affairs, and Nonproliferation
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
34. The Israeli Government Falls: New Election and Implications for U.S.-Israel Relations
- Author:
- David Makovsky and Dennis Ross
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Watch an expert webcast examining the collapse of the year-old coalition government, the impact on President Biden’s upcoming Middle East trip, and the potential consequences for broader U.S.-Israel policy.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Government, Bilateral Relations, and Elections
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and United States of America
35. Scoring Iraq’s New Government: Metrics for Preserving U.S. Interests
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- The protracted post-election process has been a step backward for Iraqi democracy, so Washington will need to closely monitor the new leadership’s actions and hold Baghdad to measurable benchmarks. Iraq’s stalled government formation process finally lurched forward on October 17, with new president Abdul Latif Rashid taking office more than a year after the 2021 election. Incoming prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani will now try to ratify his cabinet during a parliamentary session on October 22. If he succeeds as expected, Baghdad will finally close perhaps its most troubled electoral cycle yet—a chapter in which a clear popular vote nearly failed to produce a peaceful transition of power, and the losing factions spurred the biggest winner to abandon parliament through corrupt judicial rulings. Under these sad circumstances, the U.S. government and its partners need to quietly but insistently push for early, inclusive elections to restore legitimacy to the democratic process. Simultaneously, all of Iraq’s friends must watch the new government like a hawk to ensure that militias and corrupt politicians do not attempt to purge technocrats, conduct witch hunts against Western-leaning officials, cover up past graft, or initiate a new wave of “asset-stripping” via state institutions. After many false alarms, the survival of Iraq’s close relationship with the West is truly at stake right now, and only firm expectation-setting can ensure that the partnership continues.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Government, Terrorism, Reform, Democracy, and Military
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
36. The Tenacity of Young Iranians in the Protest Movement
- Author:
- Haleh Esfandiari
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Despite the regime's crackdown, Iranian protestors are showing unprecedented resilience and unity in their demands, making the international community's next steps even more crucial. Once again, Iranians have come out into the streets to protest against their government, its policies, and its leaders. Once again they face a regime that has proved itself tone-deaf to widespread public discontent—responding instead with brutality, arrests, mass trials, and executions. But this recent wave of protests has proved different. The regime is being confronted by its own children—a generation of young women and men who seek not just reform, not just an easing of controls, but a regime change. The protest movement was triggered when 22-year old Mahsa Amini died while in police custody, beaten to death by the morality police on September 16 because the form of her hijab was not to their liking. Protests quickly erupted immediately after her death, and they are now in their third month.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Reform, Democracy, Economy, Youth, and Protests
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
37. A Stabilizing Factor: Oman’s Quiet Influence amid Mounting Uncertainty in the Gulf
- Author:
- Jeonardo Jacopo Maria Mazzucco
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Based on its sound reputation as a conflict mediator and talks facilitator, Oman is well-positioned to tone down flaring rivalries in the Gulf and prevent tensions from spiraling out of control. After a timid thawing of tensions, the Gulf region is witnessing a renewed phase of uncertainty. Despite being a skillful master at navigating turbulent waters, Oman is eyeing the revamping of tensions in its immediate neighborhood with growing apprehension. The failed attempts to review the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the revamping of Iran’s outward-looking incendiary rhetoric as well as localized military retaliations amid recent mass protests, and the failure to extend the U.N.-brokered ceasefire in Yemen do not bode well for the region’s precarious stability. Muscat has a vested interest in preventing at-sea incidents from escalating and harsh infighting among rival Yemeni factions from reaching alarming proportions, especially given its coasts looking out on the Strait of Hormuz and much of its southwestern frontier bordering Yemen.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Energy Policy, and Political stability
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Oman, and Gulf Nations
38. Linking Foreign Policy and Energy Security: Iran-Pakistan gas Pipeline
- Author:
- Bibi Saira and Aisha Javed
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Political Studies
- Institution:
- Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
- Abstract:
- Energy in the context of foreign policy has become a major political concern for the stability of the country. Pakistan’s energy and foreign policy experts paid less attention to strengthening its relationship on the basis of energy with the energyrich countries. Despite its geographical significance as a potential energy corridor between the Middle East and Central Asia, Pakistan’s energy sector fails to secure its energy needs. This research study focuses on energy dynamics in the foreign policy of Pakistan and regional energy projects like the IP gas Pipeline, have been studied in detail. The study found that Pakistan is left with no other option but to execute regional energy projects if the country needs to overcome the energy crisis. The study also found that the major obstacles to executing these projects in Pakistan are a lack of financial resources, lack of investments, international pressure, the country’s internal issues, regional issues and the changing regional situation. This study is proposed to be useful for policymakers to evaluate the impact of energy import dependency and to formulate foreign policy.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Pipeline, Energy Crisis, and Energy
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, Iran, South Asia, and Middle East
39. Russia’s War on Ukraine: Iran’s Growing Role and the Nuclear Threat
- Author:
- Alistair Taylor, Philip Breedlove, and Iulia-sabina Joja
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- In today's episode, Alistair Taylor sits down with experts from MEI's Frontier Europe Initiative to assess the trajectory of Russia's war on Ukraine. They discuss Russia’s growing attacks on critical infrastructure, its recent deployment of Iranian drones and their impact on the battlefield, the potential nuclear threat, and where things might be headed from here. Today's guests are General Philip Breedlove and Iulia-Sabina Joja. General Breedlove is a retired United States Air Force General who served as Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and Commander of U.S. European Command. He’s the Distinguished Chair of MEI’s Frontier Europe Initiative and a Distinguished Professor at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at Georgia Tech. Iulia is a Senior Fellow and Director of MEI's Frontier Europe Initiative and Director of its "Afghanistan Watch" project. She teaches courses on European security at Georgetown and George Washington universities.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Infrastructure, Weapons, Drones, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Ukraine, Middle East, and Eastern Europe
40. Sanctions Against Russia: Five Lessons from the Case of Iran
- Author:
- Stefan Meister and David Ramin Jalilvand
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
- Abstract:
- Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has led to the most comprehensive economic sanctions imposed on a country of this size since the end of the Second World War. Yet sanctions are only an effective tool of foreign and security policy if they are embedded in a sustainable political strategy that considers the cost-benefit analysis for both sides. Looking at the sanctions against Iran can be helpful when it comes to learning lessons about how to deal with Russia.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Eurasia, and Ukraine
41. Biden’s Foreign Policy Casts a Long Shadow
- Author:
- Riccardo Alcaro
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- Upon taking office as US president, Joseph R. Biden vowed he would bring the United States back to the centre of the international stage after the erratic course followed by Donald Trump. One year later, it can hardly be said that he has been successful.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Transatlantic Relations, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, North America, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America
42. Holding the Hard-line: What is behind Iran’s seizure of Greek ships in Arabian Gulf?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- On May 27, Iran seized two Greek tankers, named “Prudent Warrior” and “Delta Poseidon”, in the Arabian Gulf. Forces from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) descended on the tankers and ordered them to sail to Bandar Abbas port. Onboard the tankers were 49 crew members. Greece described the operation as ‘piracy’. The seizure seems to be a reprisal for Greece’s role earlier in the month assisting the US impounding a Russian-flagged tanker transporting Iranian oil and carrying 19 crew.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Maritime, and Shipping
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Greece
43. “Maximum Pressure” Harms Diplomacy and Increases Risks of War with Iran
- Author:
- Daniel Depetris
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Defense Priorities
- Abstract:
- With an economy less than a third the size of the U.S. defense budget and a military ill-suited for offensive operations, Iran is at best a minor threat to the U.S., and one in a region of limited strategic importance. The U.S. need not obsess over Iran policy. While Iran does not threaten vital U.S. interests, U.S. policy does seek to moderate Iran’s behavior and restrict its nuclear weapons development. That is why the U.S. negotiated the JCPOA, an agreement with Iran, Europe’s major powers, Russia, and China to constrain Iran’s nuclear activities. The Trump administration abrogated the JCPOA and imposed a policy of “maximum pressure” designed to compel Iran to renegotiate on nuclear issues and moderate its foreign policy. Rather than capitulate to U.S. demands, Iran expanded its nuclear program and increased its aggression in the Middle East. U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and imposition of a maximum pressure strategy harmed diplomatic efforts with Iran and increased the prospects of direct conflict. The Biden administration has so far continued the policy it inherited from the Trump administration. With nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran predictably stalled, U.S. officials should abandon maximum pressure. Ongoing diplomacy is the best path to revive the JCPOA, and more importantly, lower the risks of war. Even if the JCPOA dissolves completely, U.S.-Iran diplomacy, including on nuclear issues, should continue. War with Iran is not worth the costs.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Conflict, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
44. The Netanyahu Doctrine: A paradigm shift in the State of Israel's foreign policy/La Doctrina Netanyahu: Un Cambio de Paradigma en la Política Exterior del Estado de Israel
- Author:
- Alberto Priego
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
- Institution:
- Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
- Abstract:
- After almost 75 years of existence of the State of Israel, its foreign policy has maintained a certain continuity. Some prime ministers such as David Ben Gurion, Menahem Begin, Isaac Rabin have taken some turns in foreign policy that in the long term will condition Israel's future. Last summer Benjamin Netanyahu left the government after more than twelve years in office, becoming the longest-serving Israeli leader. Throughout these years, Benjamin Netanyahu has introduced important structural reforms in the country. One of these fields has been foreign policy, where he has implemented his own doctrine, the Netanyahu Doctrine. This article will try to present the fundamental points that make up this foreign policy doctrine. An interpretative approach will be adopted using the most important speeches of Benjamin Netanyahu. / En los casi 75 años de existencia del Estado de Israel, su política exterior ha mantenido una cierta continuidad. Algunos primeros ministros como David Ben-Gurión, Menahem Begin, Issac Rabín han dado giros a la política exterior que, a largo plazo, han condicionado el futuro de Israel. El pasado verano Benjamín Netanyahu salió del gobierno después de más de doce años en el cargo convirtiéndose en el mandatario israelí que más tiempo ha permanecido en el cargo. A lo largo de estos años, Benjamín Netanyahu ha introducido importantes reformas estructurales en país. Uno de estos campos ha sido la política exterior donde se puede considerar que se ha instalado una doctrina propia, la Doctrina Netanyahu. Este artículo tratará de construir los puntos fundamentales que componen esta doctrina de política exterior. Se adoptará una aproximación interpretativa usando los discursos más importantes de Benjamín Netanyahu.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Economy, Negotiation, Peace, and Benjamin Netanyahu
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine
45. Saudi Arabia: A Colossus with Clay Feets/Arabia Saudí: Un coloso con los pies de barro
- Author:
- Eugenia López-Jacoiste Díaz
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
- Institution:
- Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
- Abstract:
- The political-religious foundation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is Wahhabism that marks its identity, society and politics. The Al Saud dynasty defends and expands Sunni Islam in the region and beyond its borders. In order to understand the interests and objectives of Saudi foreign policy, this article analyzes the main geopolitical elements at the service of the stability and hegemony of the Al Saud house in the most turbulent region of the Middle East. The Saudi government is developing a foreign policy, unsuspected in the past, to maintain its historic alliance with Washington, despite the ups and downs, and to transform the old rivalries between Riyadh and Tehran into new opportunities, including with Israel. This change in Saudi foreign policy is due to the controversial Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman who knows how to take advantage of the changing regional geopolitics and Saudi financial instruments, but also the military and technological in favor of a more proactive and modern Saudi Arabia, despite his weaknesses./El fundamento político-religioso del Reino de Arabia Saudí es el wahabismo que marca su identidad, su sociedad y su política. La dinastía Al Saud defiende y expande el islam sunní en la región y fuera de sus fronteras. Para poder entender los intereses y objetivos de la política exterior saudí, este artículo analiza los principales elementos geopolíticos al servicio de la estabilidad y hegemonía de la casa Al Saud en la región más convulsa de Oriente Medio. El Gobierno saudí está desarrollando una política exterior, insospechada en el pasado para mantener su histórica alianza con Washington, a pesar de los altibajos, y transformar las viejas rivalidades entre Riad y Teherán en nuevas oportunidades, incluso con Israel. Este cambio en la política exterior saudí se debe al controvertido Príncipe Heredero Mohamed bin Salmán que sabe aprovechar la cambiante geopolítica regional y los instrumentos financieros saudíes, pero también los militares y tecnológicos a favor de una Arabia Saudí más proactiva y moderna, a pesar de sus debilidades.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Government, Oil, Military Affairs, Geopolitics, and Wahhabism
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Persian Gulf, and United States of America
46. Beyond Borders: Middle East in Empire, Diaspora, and Global Transitions (Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy, Spring 2021)
- Author:
- Reilly Barry
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The Middle East saw its share of globe-altering events in the last year. While JMEPP seeks to offer original analysis beyond the headlines, almost all major contemporary regional developments have been addressed in the present edition. The list, of course, is not exhaustive, but includes the Abraham Accords and increasing international marginalization of Palestinians, the renewed fighting over Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan, continued protests amidst crises and weakening state institutions in Lebanon, and the rise of Turkey’s aggressive imperial foreign policy, to name a few. While there are major global transitions afoot as relates to the region, there is also a lack of transition— sadly, the 10-year anniversary of the Syrian revolution marks little change for those living under the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad. Likewise, the humanitarian crisis in Yemen persists. The edition discusses what may become of newly inaugurated President Biden’s policies toward the region, including the challenge of renegotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. And finally, the edition would be remiss to not address how Covid-19 has impacted the region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Diaspora, Refugees, Social Media, Alliance, Conflict, Protests, Peace, Houthis, COVID-19, and Polarization
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, Georgia, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, United States of America, and Nagorno-Karabakh
47. Strategic Report
- Author:
- Zaid Eyadat and Moh'd Khair Eiedat
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
- Abstract:
- This is not a historical nor chronological report. It is rather “a working paper”. The purpose of this rather brief report is to reflect on three major issues: first, what are the characteristics of the world we live in? How stable and predictable is it? Are those in power know what are they doing? Or is it the blind leading the blind? Is our sense of uncertainty and thus unpredictability a product of mental crisis related to one in a lifetime pandemic experience? or is it more structural with long historical span? The second question is how dangerous and out of control is the Middle east region? Or is it? The Abraham Accords promise a new dawn for the region? Paradise is just around the corner or the calm preceding the storm? The third question, where does Jordan fit in these wider circles of activities both global and regional? Deliberately we left out of the report any serious considerations of the economic aspect challenge facing Jordan which is both self-evident and widely recognized. Moreover, the emphasis is on the geostrategic aspects of security related to the global level, the regional level and that of Jordan. Let us first look at the world.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Power, Geopolitics, and Strategic Planning
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Jordan
48. Iran in Syria: From Expansion to Entrenchment
- Author:
- Ido Yahel
- Publication Date:
- 06-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
- Abstract:
- Iranian involvement in the Syrian civil war has often made headlines in Israel. Particularly in the context of the Israel Defense Force (IDF)’s so-called campaign between the wars (the Hebrew acronym is Mabam), which has included attempts to prevent Iran from establishing military bases in Syria, keeping Iranian forces away from the Syrian-Israeli border, and thwarting the transfer of precision weapons to Hizballah. But Iranian involvement in Syria goes far beyond the confines of the Israeli-Iranian conflict. As a result of the "Arab Spring" uprising and the Syrian civil war, Iran has succeeded in establishing itself in areas far from the Israeli-Syrian border and extended its influence in Syria beyond the military sphere.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Conflict, and Syrian War
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Syria
49. Hizballah’s Gain, Lebanon’s Pain
- Author:
- Joel Parker and Sarah Cahn
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies
- Abstract:
- On August 6, Hizballah fired 20 rockets towards the Shebaa Farms area of the Golan Heights, highlighting the growing political instability in Lebanon. Hizballah's behavior should be viewed in light of the ongoing financial and political crisis that has affected every aspect of Lebanese life since late 2019 and has pushed hundreds of thousands of people into poverty. Hizballah may not be the primary or sole cause of the crisis, but it is important to understand how it may have contributed indirectly to it, how it may benefit from it, and why it may not have an interest in fully resolving it. Hanin Ghaddar, the Friedmann Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), argues that despite the collapsing economy in Lebanon, Hizballah has been able to expand its array of social-welfare institutions to deepen their Shiʿi constituency's dependence and even expand the reach of these programs by providing support to a growing number of Lebanese who are struggling to survive. Hizballah also receives funding from Iran and through its commercial activities around the world, so one might ask how much Hizballah really needs the Lebanese state. Lina Khatib, a scholar at Chatham House and SOAS University of London, contends that Hizballah benefits from its hybrid role as a part of the state and, at the same time, free to operate outside the official channels of government and public scrutiny. Michael Young, senior editor at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, however, has argued that the group might indeed benefit from a collapse of the state, which will allow Hizballah to continue to fill a growing political, economic, and social power vacuum.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Hezbollah, Regional Power, and Economic Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Lebanon
50. President Biden: Try for a Double Play on Iran and Afghanistan
- Author:
- Jon Greenwald
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Council on International Policy (CIP)
- Abstract:
- Southwest Asia is increasingly dangerous. Negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program appear stuck near a breakpoint. With the Kabul government’s precipitous collapse, President Biden’s courageous decision to remove U.S. troops from Afghanistan has gone badly. Each situation threatens grave consequences for the administration. Together they suggest more deadly chaos looms from the Middle East to China’s borders. Iran is an important common factor, central to the first case, important in the second due to geography and potential leverage. The concurrence of threat – but also perhaps opportunity – justifies a new strategy for dealing with it that cuts across both situations. Joe Biden said before taking office that it was a priority to restore the nuclear deal that was working well until Donald Trump took the U.S. out. He pledged to conclude the endless war in Afghanistan. Today neither objective appears promising. Iran has more enriched and closer to weapons level uranium than when the original deal was signed. U.S. officials acknowledge that negotiating time is limited and, by implication, that military action may be required to keep the president’s pledge never to allow an Iranian bomb. As the Taliban takes over Afghanistan, Washington is focused as it should be on safely extracting U.S. citizens and the many thousands of Afghans whose lives are at risk for having helped the Americans over 20 years. Soon, however, there will be new proposals, including preparations for off-shore responses to what many anticipate will be a revival of the kind of civil war that ravaged Afghanistan in the 1990s. Any reasonable proposal should include at the least a significant diplomatic component in which Afghanistan’s neighbors, Iran prominent among them, apply their weight to persuade the Taliban to rule more moderately than it did its first time in power and in particular to keep out international terrorists. Most acknowledge that a key weakness of that approach is U.S. inability to work with Tehran.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
51. A Strategy to Contain Hezbollah: Ideas and Recommendations
- Author:
- Hanin Ghaddar
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Since securing a parliamentary majority, the group has consistently prioritized its own interests over those of the Lebanese people through practices such as illicit drug production, sex trafficking, and the buildup of its military arsenal. When Lebanese took to the streets in October 2019 to rail against government corruption, a lack of accountability, and runaway consumer prices, they coalesced around the chant “All of them!”—meaning that every political actor in the country held some blame for the national meltdown. But the slogan glossed over the important fact that one group in particular, Hezbollah, deserved the most blame. Since notching a parliamentary majority in 2018, the Iran-backed military-political organization has consistently prioritized its own interests over those of the Lebanese people through practices such as illicit drug production, sex trafficking, and—of course—the buildup of its military arsenal. In this Policy Note, Hanin Ghaddar, an expert on Lebanon who worked for years as a journalist in the country, explains why Hezbollah poses such a menace and what the international community can do about it. Foremost, she recommends that the United States and its partners intensify pressure on Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsor while simultaneously engaging with a new generation of Lebanese who want to free themselves from the group’s stranglehold.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Democracy, Hezbollah, and Shia
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and Lebanon
52. Iranian Perceptions of the U.S. Soft Power Threat
- Author:
- Amir Toumaj
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Fearing a Western-inspired overthrow, Tehran has intensified enforcement of morality laws, purged professors from universities, and poured billions of dollars into the creation of a separate national intranet. To understand Iranian anxieties about Western cultural invasion, one need look no further than Psychological Operations Quarterly, a journal published until recently by the IRGC’s Social-Cultural Directorate. Focusing on the “soft war” waged by various Western entities, the periodical covers such material as supposedly anti-Iranian films (Alexander, The Wrestler, Argo), the relationship between McDonald’s franchises and the fall of the Soviet Union, and the harm done by English-language textbooks to the Iranian mind. Since 1979, in response to such perceived threats, the Islamic Republic has intensified enforcement of morality laws, purged professors from universities, and poured billions of dollars into creating a national intranet separate from the wider internet, among other repressive moves. In this deeply sourced Policy Note, Iran expert Amir Toumaj discusses the many dimensions of Tehran’s paranoia, all of which lead back to fears of a U.S.-spurred “soft overthrow.” Unfortunately, he argues, American leaders will struggle in vain to change the minds of Iran’s ruling hardliners, but they can facilitate longer-term progress by promoting access to diverse viewpoints for the Iranian people.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics, and Soft Power
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
53. Potential Cooperation: Iranian Possible Cooperation with Taliban to Curb Threats
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- The situation in Afghanistan, after the Taliban took over the country, is the second key issue that the new Iranian president, Ebrahim Raisi’s, foreign policy agenda, after reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, International Cooperation, Taliban, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, and Middle East
54. Mutual Concessions: Did al-Kadhimi’s visit to Tehran achieve its objectives?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- On September 12, 2021, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, led a high-profile government delegation on an official one-day visit to Tehran that came upon invitation from Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi. Besides Raisi, al-Kadhimi also met Ali Shamkhani, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and other senior officials.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Domestic Politics, and Energy
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
55. Religious Aspects of the Iran-Azerbaijan Conflict: Is There a Danger of a New Hybrid War?
- Author:
- Aleksandre Kvakhadze
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- Relations between Iran and Azerbaijan have become unprecedentedly strained over the past month. Iranian military forces are mobilizing across the Iran-Azerbaijan border. At the same time, a new Turkish military contingent was deployed in Azerbaijan and joint military exercises were held in the territory of the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic.1 Officials from both countries were engaged in an unfriendly rhetoric. It is unlikely that this tension between Iran and the Turkey-Azerbaijan military alliance will escalate into an open, large-scale military confrontation, but, nevertheless, there is the opinion that the Iranian state will continue hybrid warfare in Azerbaijan through the support of political and religious groups in the medium and long term based on the examples of other countries.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Religion, Alliance, and Hybrid Warfare
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Azerbaijan
56. The Interests of Turkey and Iran in Afghanistan: Threats and Challenges
- Author:
- Zurab Batiashvili
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- In the summer of 2021, as the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan, the balance of power in the country changed rapidly, and by August 15, the Taliban was able to capture the capital, Kabul, almost without a fight. On September 7, the Taliban formed a new "government" steered by Sharia Law. The Taliban also renamed the country, and, according to them, Afghanistan is now called the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." There are no women or members of the Shiite minority in the new government. Of the 33 members of the still-incomplete government, only three belong to ethnic minorities.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Taliban, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, and Turkey
57. Post-War Situation in the South Caucasus Region
- Author:
- Farid Shafiyev
- Publication Date:
- 12-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Caucasus Strategic Perspectives
- Institution:
- Center of Analysis of International Relations (AIR Center)
- Abstract:
- The current issue of the Caucasus Strategic Perspectives (CSP) journal entitled “Post-War Situation in the South Caucasus Region” is dedicated to the possible cooperation opportunities in the aftermath of latest 44-day war between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the fall of 2020 with focus on different views from various experts driven from different countries.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, History, European Union, Geopolitics, Conflict, Peace, and Domestic Policy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Turkey, Azerbaijan, South Caucasus, and United States of America
58. Iranian Public Opinion at the Start of the Biden Administration: Report
- Author:
- Nancy Gallagher, Clay Ramsay, and Ebrahim Mohseni
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
- Abstract:
- This report covers findings from two surveys fielded in September and early October 2020 and late January through early February 2021 to assess how Iranians were faring as the covid-19 pandemic intensified the challenges their country was already facing, what they thought about the parliamentary election in Iran and the presidential election in the United States, and how the inauguration of Joe Biden impacted their attitudes towards nuclear diplomacy and regional security. Iran was one of the earliest countries to be hard-hit by the novel coronavirus, with the country’s first cases confirmed on February 13, 2020, two days before the parliamentary election, senior officials among those soon infected, and high death rates reported. Western reporting depicted widespread government incompetence and cover-ups exacerbating the pandemic’s toll. As in other countries, Iranian officials struggled to decide whether to close schools, curtail economic activities, and restrict religious observances in hopes of slowing the virus’ spread, but cases and deaths remained high through 2020. When we fielded the first survey wave, the daily number of new confirmed covid-19 cases in Iran was starting to climb sharply again after having been relatively flat since May. Some world leaders, including the U.N. Secretary General, called for an easing of sanctions on Iran as part of global efforts to fight the pandemic. The United States, which had withdrawn from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018, maintained that medicine, personal protective equipment, and other humanitarian supplies were exempt from the steadily increasing sanctions applied as part of its “maximum pressure” campaign. But, the United States’ designation in September 2019 of the Central Bank of Iran as a terrorist organization made most foreign suppliers of humanitarian goods reluctant to sell to Iran. A decision in October 2020 to also designate the few Iranian banks that were not previously subject to secondary sanctions further impeded humanitarian trade, caused another sharp drop in the value of Iran’s currency, and had other negative economic effects. The Trump administration’s stated objective was to keep imposing more sanctions until Iran acquiesced to a long list of U.S. demands articulated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The original twelve points include the types of restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program that the government rejected during previous negotiations and that the Iranian public has consistently opposed. It also included stopping development of nuclear-capable missiles and ending support for various groups throughout the Middle East.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Public Opinion, and International Community
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
59. Four Scenarios for the Iran Nuclear Deal
- Author:
- Riccardo Alcaro
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- After a hiatus of over five months, negotiations to restore the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, have finally resumed in Vienna. Struck in July 2015 by Iran and a group of six powers – France, Germany and the UK plus China, Russia and the US, as well as the EU (E3/EU+3)–, the JCPOA placed limits on Iranian nuclear activities, while also introducing a highly intrusive inspection regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The deal is in a comatose state due to former US President Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally pull out of the agreement and re-adopt all sanctions on Iran in May 2018. In response, since May 2019 Iran has progressively reduced its compliance with its non-proliferation obligations under the deal.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Treaties and Agreements, Disarmament, Nonproliferation, Transatlantic Relations, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
60. US-Iran Relations After Trump: The Path to Peace is Open
- Author:
- Assal Rad
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
- Institution:
- Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
- Abstract:
- The attacks on 11 September 2001 not only shaped the focus of US foreign policy over the last two decades, but also de!ned how a generation of Americans understood the gravity of these policies by bringing the cost and tragedy of con"ict home. For many young Americans, it was the !rst time they became aware of the extent of US interventionism and how it impacts the way other nations and peoples view the United States. But events over the last year in the United States have brought the attitude of US foreign policy—which has long been driven by the idea that problems can be solved exclusively through militarism and force—much closer to home. Images of police violently confronting Black Lives Matter protestors and an insurrection at the Capitol were often likened to images of war zones abroad, the very wars started by the United States.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
61. Toward an Inclusive Security Arrangement in the Persian Gulf
- Author:
- Trita Parsi
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- • Abandon dominance. For many of the United States’ security partners, even a dysfunctional Pax Americana is preferable to the compromises that a security architecture would inevitably entail. The preconditions for creating a successful security architecture can emerge only if the United States begins a military withdrawal from the Persian Gulf and credibly signals it no longer seeks to sustain hegemony. • Encourage regional dialogue, but let the region lead. The incoming Biden administration’s hint that it will seek an inclusive security dialogue in the Persian Gulf is a welcome first step toward shifting the burden of security to the regional states themselves. For such an effort to be successful, the United States should play a supporting role while urging regional states to take the lead. • Include other major powers. The regional dialogue should include the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and major Asian powers with a strong interest in stability in the Persian Gulf. Including them can help dilute Washington’s and Beijing’s roles while protecting the region from inter–Asian rivalries in the future.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, National Security, United Nations, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Military Affairs, and Grand Strategy
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, and Persian Gulf
62. Iranian Politics Leading Up to the 2021 Presidential Elections and US Influences
- Author:
- Mari Nukii
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Research Paper
- Institution:
- Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
- Abstract:
- It is no exaggeration to say that Iran has been one of victims most suffered from the Trump administration's 'America First' policy in the four years since President Trump's inauguration in 2017. The main cause was Trump's unilateral declaration on May 8, 2018 to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and resume sanctions against Iran. Furthermore, in May 2019, the United States imposed a total embargo on Iranian oil and sent the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and bomber units to the Middle East, heightening the risk of military conflict between the two countries.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Elections, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
63. Iran's New Legislation for Escalation and Options for the New US Administration
- Author:
- Nobumasa Akiyama
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
- Abstract:
- On January 20, 2021, a new administration will take office in the United States. This could lead to changes in US-Iran relations. The Trump administration continued to provoke Iran by withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), tightening sanctions, and killing Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani. Meanwhile, the incoming president Joe Biden and key members of his diplomatic team are oriented toward a return to the JCPOA. In the midst of all this, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a nuclear scientist who is believed to have played a central role in Iran's nuclear development, was murdered. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani responded by saying he would retaliate at an "appropriate" time, and an advisor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei said he would take "decisive" action. Although the US is not believed to have been directly involved in this incident, there are concerns that it will cast a dark shadow on the diplomacy between the US and Iran over the JCPOA. Shortly thereafter, Iran's parliament passed a law that obliges the government to take steps to expand nuclear activities that significantly exceed the JCPOA's limits and to seek the lifting of sanctions. The new US administration will need to be very careful not to overlook either hard or soft signals, to analyze Iran's future course, and to take diplomatic steps to reduce Iran's nuclear and regional security threats.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, JCPOA, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
64. Moscow's Central Role: Have the Rules of Engagement Changed in Syria after the recent Israeli Strikes?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 08-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- On July 19, 22 and 25, Israel carried out three strikes in less than one week using surface-to-air missiles against Syria. These strikes are considered the first of their kind executed by the new Israeli "Bennett-Lapid" government. Although this type of strikes is not novel, the Russian reaction to it was different this time. The Russian Ministry of Defense engaged in the scene for the first time, sending indirect messages to Israel. This made analysts refer to a possible shift in the rules of engagement in Syria. The understandings between Moscow and Tel Aviv were based on Moscow turning a blind eye to Israeli fighters launching airstrikes in Syria against Iranian targets, in return for Israel not targeting Syrian regime forces or Russian forces, which provide direct support to the Syrian army against the armed opposition. The Russian position reflected a clear desire to weaken the Iranian military presence in Syria, particularly with the escalation of rivalry between Moscow and Tehran over economic and military influence there.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Armed Forces, Military Affairs, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
65. Curtailing Tehran: Breaking down the validation of Israeli conjectures if Damascus is constraining Iranian military activities
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- The Israeli ‘Walla’ news website published a report that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has reorganized the deployment of military forces in Syria, and has restricted the movement of Iranian forces internally in order to prevent internal frictions and achieve peace and stability. Walla deems the change in Damascus’s stance towards Iran to be in response to the political, economic and military pressures implored on the former. The website has also indicated that the Iranian presence in Syria has also weakened for other reasons, including the continuous Israeli and US pressures on Iranian presence there. While there were no sources confirming such notions, considering the policies of regional and international powers’ concerning the Syrian crisis, there might be some truth to this notion, pushing Damascus to embrace such tactics.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Political stability, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
66. The Battle of Time: Why is Washington showing little interest in Iran's presidential elections?
- Author:
- FARAS
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- The Biden administration has been keen on sending several messages implying that it shows little interest in the results of the Iran presidential elections due to take place on June 18. Washington believes that the identity of Iran's next president will not change the decision-making trends in Tehran or the potential course of the relations between Iran and the US over the next phase. On March 11, Robert Malley, the US envoy to Iran, said that “Iran's elections in June are not a factor in the Biden administration’s decision-making for how to proceed with nuclear talks” adding that “the pace will be determined by how far we can get consistent with defending U.S. national security interests”. He continued saying, “we won’t rush or slow things because of the Iranian elections”. This reflects several indicators relevant to the new strategy adopted by the Biden administration in dealing with Iran during the current phase, which can be addressed as follows:
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, National Security, Elections, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Washington
67. The Post-Rouhani Era: The future of US-Iranian relations under Raisi
- Author:
- Hussam Ibrahim
- Publication Date:
- 06-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
- Abstract:
- After the announcement of the victory of Ebrahim Raisi, Iran's hard-line judiciary chief, various analysts raised questions about the future of US-Iranian relations, particularly in light of major determinants. The most prominent of which is Ebrahim Raisi himself, who is subject to US sanctions, and his term, which may coincide with reaching a new nuclear agreement between Washington and Tehran, as well as the current debate in Washington’s political circles regarding the situation in Iran.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Elections, and Hassan Rouhani
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
68. The Interests of Turkey and Iran in Afghanistan: Threats and Challenges
- Author:
- Zurab Batiashvili
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- In the summer of 2021, as the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan, the balance of power in the country changed rapidly, and by August 15, the Taliban was able to capture the capital, Kabul, almost without a fight. On September 7, the Taliban formed a new "government" steered by Sharia Law. The Taliban also renamed the country, and, according to them, Afghanistan is now called the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." There are no women or members of the Shiite minority in the new government.Of the 33 members of the still-incomplete government, only three belong to ethnic minorities. Interestingly, the four new "ministers" of the country are former inmates of Guantanamo Bay, having served time there for organizing terrorist activities. Sirajuddin Haqqani, the "Minister of Internal Affairs" of the new "government" of Afghanistan, is still wanted by the FBI on the same charges. A reward of $5 million is being offered for his capture. There is already the threat of a humanitarian catastrophe (food shortages), and instability (internal strife) in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands of Afghans are fleeing their homes, many of them heading to Iran and Turkey. This poses a number of threats and challenges to these countries, especially since they have their own interests in Afghanistan.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Government, Taliban, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, Turkey, and Middle East
69. Baku Parade Whispers Geopolitical Complexities in the South Caucasus
- Author:
- Rahim Rahimov
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a military parade in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku on December 10 to celebrate Azerbaijan’s victory over Armenia in the war over the Karabakh region that ended with the Russia-brokered armistice on November 9-10. The Russian historian, Andrey Zubov, describes the Baku parade as an occasion “rather to celebrate the birth of a new geopolitical alliance than the victory over Armenia”1 . Following the parade, Russia imposed a ban on tomato imports from Azerbaijan in its flagship manner and Russian peacekeepers attempted to do something around the town of Shusha in Karabakh resembling what they have done in Georgia: “borderization”. Azerbaijani state TV, other media outlets and public figures widely and explicitly condemned such behavior of the Russian peacekeepers as a jealous response to the parade demonstration of Armenia’s Russian-made weapons and military equipment captured by the Azerbaijani armed forces or destroyed using Turkish-made Bayraktar drones . Erdogan and the Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, watched Turkish soldiers march alongside with Azerbaijanis on the central streets of Baku to the joy of local residents who took to the streets despite the COVID-19 related restrictions in order to salute them. This scene shows a major Russian weakness vis-àvis Turkey in Azerbaijan. Unlike Moscow, whose perception in Azerbaijan is controversial, Ankara enjoys nation-wide support. Recently leaked Russian secret files reveal that it is much more difficult for Moscow to develop proRussian civil society organizations and soft power instruments in Azerbaijan than even in staunchly pro-Western Georgia.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Turkey, France, Georgia, and South Caucasus
70. The Coming Iran Nuclear Talks: Openings and Obstacles
- Author:
- Dennis Ross
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- A reimagined approach to Iran nuclear talks could extend the country’s breakout time, preserve U.S. negotiating leverage, and strengthen American alliances in Europe and across the Middle East. In the first in a series of TRANSITION 2021 memos examining policy challenges across the Middle East, esteemed diplomat and policymaker Dennis Ross provides an innovative approach to reengaging Iran in nuclear diplomacy. His ideas have the potential to extend Iran’s breakout time, preserve U.S. negotiating leverage, and strengthen U.S. alliances in Europe and across the Middle East. Ross explains: “If regime change is not a realistic or advisable goal, the objective must be one of changing the Islamic Republic’s behavior. While this would be difficult, history shows that the regime will make tactical adjustments with strategic consequences when it considers the price of its policies to be too high.” In the coming weeks, TRANSITION 2021 memos by Washington Institute experts will address the broad array of issues facing the Biden-Harris administration in the Middle East. These range from thematic issues, such as the region’s strategic position in the context of Great Power competition and how to most effectively elevate human rights and democracy in Middle East policy, to more discrete topics, from Arab-Israel peace diplomacy to Red Sea security to challenges and opportunities in northwest Africa. Taken as a whole, this series of memos will present a comprehensive approach for advancing U.S. interests in security and peace in this vital but volatile region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Nuclear Power, and Joe Biden
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America
71. Turkey and Iran: Parallel Islam imperialist ambitions for the Middle East
- Author:
- Jonathan Spyer
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Neither Ankara nor Tehran want a strong Iraq, or a strong Syria. On the contrary, the fragmentation of these countries suits both.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Imperialism, Regional Cooperation, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria
72. Assessing the US strategy in Iraq
- Author:
- Jonathan Spyer
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
- Abstract:
- Only an integrated political, military and economic strategy targeting the Iranian system in all its aspects, with a long-term commitment to local allies and the mission, can succeed.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Conflict, Strategic Interests, and Intervention
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
73. Structural Shifts and Regional Security: A View from Israel
- Author:
- Ehud Eiran
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Istituto Affari Internazionali
- Abstract:
- Israel is still holding to its traditional security maxim. Based on a perception of a hostile region, Israel’s response includes early warning, deterrence and swift – including pre-emptive – military action, coupled with an alliance with a global power, the US. Israel is adjusting these maxims to a changing reality. Overlapping interests – and perhaps the prospect of an even more open conflict with Iran – led to limited relationships between Israel and some Gulf states. These, however, will be constrained until Israel makes progress on the Palestine issue. Israel aligned with Greece and Cyprus around energy and security, which may lead to conflict with Turkey. Russia’s deployment in Syria placed new constraints on Israeli freedom of action there. The US’s retrenchment from the Middle East is not having a direct effect on Israel, while the Trump administration’s support for Israel’s territorial designs in the West Bank may make it easier for Israel to permanently expand there, thus sowing the seeds for future instability in Israel/Palestine. The EU could try and balance against such developments, but, as seen from Israel, is too divided to have a significant impact. Paper produced in the framework of the FEPS-IAI project “Fostering a New Security Architecture in the Middle East”, April 2020.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Gas, and Hezbollah
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Cyprus, United States of America, and Mediterranean
74. Iran’s foreign policy: Buying time until the US presidential elections
- Author:
- Mariette Hagglund
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- A key issue dominating Iran’s foreign policy agenda is the future of the Iran nuclear deal with regard to the next US president. Non-state armed groups mark the core of Iran’s leverage in the region, but Iran is currently looking into diversifying its means of influence. Although Iran considers its non-aligned position a strength, it is also a weakness. In an otherwise interconnected world, where other regional powers enjoy partnerships with other states and can rely on external security guarantors, Iran remains alone. By being more integrated into regional cooperation and acknowledged as a regional player, Iran could better pursue its interests, but US attempts to isolate the country complicate any such efforts. In the greater superpower competition between the US and China, Iran is unlikely to choose a side despite its current “look East” policy, but may take opportunistic decisions.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, and Elections
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Iran, Middle East, Asia, and North America
75. The Battle for the Soul of Islam
- Author:
- James M Dorsey
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Hudson Institute
- Abstract:
- It is not the caliphate that the world’s Muslim powerhouses are fighting about. Instead, they are engaged in a deepening religious soft power struggle for geopolitical influence and dominance. This battle for the soul of Islam pits rival Middle Eastern and Asian powers against one another: Turkey, seat of the Islamic world’s last true caliphate; Saudi Arabia, home to the faith’s holy cities; the United Arab Emirates, propagator of a militantly statist interpretation of Islam; Qatar with its less strict version of Wahhabism and penchant for political Islam; Indonesia, promoting a humanitarian, pluralistic notion of Islam that reaches out to other faiths as well as non-Muslim centre-right forces across the globe; Morocco which uses religion as a way to position itself as the face of moderate Islam; and Shia Iran with its derailed revolution. In the ultimate analysis, no clear winner may emerge. Yet, the course of the battle could determine the degree to which Islam will be defined by either one or more competing stripes of ultra-conservativism—statist forms of the faith that preach absolute obedience to political rulers and/or reduce religious establishments to pawns of the state.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Islam, Politics, and Ideology
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Indonesia, Turkey, Middle East, Asia, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates
76. Greece and Israeli-Turkish relations
- Author:
- George Tzogopoulos
- Publication Date:
- 05-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
- Abstract:
- This essay by Dr. George Tzogopoulos, focuses on the multidimensional nature of Greek-Israeli relations. The understanding of the depth of these relations can explain why the two countries – along with Cyprus – are interested in coming closer. On the other hand, the effort of Israel and Turkey to normalize bilateral ties – already under way since 2016 – is a logical development that deserves attention. However, it is not related to the future evolution of Greek-Israeli collaboration. The evolution of Greek-Israeli relations in the last decade and trilateral Greece-Israel-Cyprus summits outline the common interest of the three countries to enrich their cooperation. Israel and Turkey have started since 2016 to normalize their relations. This is an ongoing process that has evolved in a period during which Greece, Israel and Cyprus charted a joint course in the Eastern Mediterranean. Israel and Turkey are expected to find a modus vivendi by agreeing on some issues and disagreeing on others. A potential Turkish-Israeli collaboration against Iran in Syria might pave the way for new synergies between Israel and Turkey. This is a highly controversial and complicated matter that entails risks for Ankara.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, and Syria
77. Sanctions by the Numbers: Spotlight on Iran
- Author:
- Abigail Eineman
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
- Abstract:
- The June edition of “Sanctions by the Numbers” illustrated a decade of U.S. sanctions policy by using heat maps to show the countries with the largest number of designations. Across both the Trump and Obama administrations, Iran was always at the top of the list. This edition of Sanctions by the Numbers explores Iran sanctions further, tracking how designations and delistings have evolved over time, the dozens of countries affected by Iran-related sanctions programs, and the top types of U.S. designations. The data add to the existing consensus that sanctions have an inverse relationship with Iran’s economic health, and designations have far outpaced delistings in the last three years as part of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
78. Sanctions by the Numbers: The Geographic Distribution of U.S. Sanctions
- Author:
- Abigail Eineman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
- Abstract:
- In February, CNAS launched Sanctions by the Numbers, a project to track U.S. sanctions designations and delistings. In this second installment, heat maps show the most heavily targeted states in three periods of time: over the course of the Obama administration from 2009–2017, the Trump administration from 2017–June 2020, and a snapshot of the past decade through June 2020. The maps rely on ten years of sanctions data published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control at the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- Iran, North America, and United States of America
79. Countering Iran in the Gray Zone: What the United States Should Learn from Israel’s Operations in Syria
- Author:
- Ilan Goldenberg, Nicholas Heras, Kaleigh Thomas, and Jennie Matuschak
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
- Abstract:
- Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and especially since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Iran has become highly proficient in using its surrogates and proxies across the Middle East as a tool to achieve its interests while avoiding direct conflict with the United States. Successive U.S. presidents have sought options for pushing back against this Iranian strategy but have struggled to find approaches that could deter Iran’s actions or degrade its capabilities. In most cases U.S. administrations have been hesitant to respond at all, for fear of starting a larger conflict. The recent killing of Qassim Soleimani represents the opposite problem, in which the United States and Iran came unnecessarily close to a much larger war. In contrast, Israel’s “campaign between the wars” (the Hebrew acronym is mabam) against Iran and Iranian-backed groups in Syria has been one of the most successful military efforts to push back against Iran in the “gray zone.” Since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, and especially since early 2017, Israel has conducted more than 200 airstrikes inside Syria against more than 1,000 targets linked to Iran and it’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force (IRGCQF), and against IRGC-QF backed groups such as the Lebanese Hezbollah. This campaign has slowed Iran’s military buildup in Syria while avoiding a broader regional conflagration that would have been damaging to Israel’s interests.1 This study examines Israel’s mabam campaign and asks what lessons the United States can draw and how they may be applied to future U.S. actions in gray zone conflicts, both against Iran and more broadly.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Conflict, and Syrian War
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria
80. A Plan for U.S. Withdrawal from the Middle East
- Author:
- Mike Sweeney
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Defense Priorities
- Abstract:
- Thinking through the process of transiting U.S. forces completely out of the Middle East gives additional depth to conversations on force reductions and further normalizes the idea that the United States can eventually leave the region. The underlying social and economic forces that produced the Arab Spring demonstrations of 2011 have not been adequately addressed. They will likely spark additional instability in the years ahead. This fact should affect not only U.S. considerations about decamping the region, but also the pace and speed of a withdrawal. Iranian missile capabilities—as demonstrated in the retaliatory attacks following the death of Qassem Soleimani–allow Tehran to increasingly contest U.S. presence in the region. This will be a long-term factor in U.S. basing decisions, regardless of force levels. The center of gravity for U.S. presence in the Middle East is the “core four” of Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). They account for more than half the total number of U.S. troops in the region and also host the most substantial physical basing infrastructure. The direction of a U.S. withdrawal should be away from the center and toward the periphery, with forces flowing from the Persian Gulf west and south toward redoubts in Jordan and Oman. A measured timetable of four years would allow the United States to significantly reduce its presence by as much as 50,000 military personnel when rotational deployments (like carrier deployments) are factored in. At the end of the four-year period, the United States would be postured to return to a role as offshore balancer with an option to completely withdraw from the region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Armed Forces, and Instability
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
81. Renewing transatlantic strategy on Iran
- Author:
- Ellie Geranmayeh, Barbara Slavin, and Sahil Shah
- Publication Date:
- 11-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Atlantic Council
- Abstract:
- The election of former Vice President Joe Biden in the United States presents the prospect of major changes in US foreign policy, especially toward Iran. These changes cannot begin to be implemented until after Inauguration Day in January of the new year, while an urgent need exists for other players to bridge the gap. None are better suited to this task than the US’s closest allies in Europe which have already played a significant role in the negotiations that led to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Britain, France and Germany – the E-3 – and the European Union have also worked tirelessly to keep the JCPOA alive in the face of the unilateral US withdrawal from the agreement in 2018, the imposition of draconian sanctions by the Trump administration and escalating tensions in the Middle East. A new report by Ellie Geranmayeh, Barbara Slavin, and Sahil Shah presents a series of recommendations for the E-3 and the EU to preserve the JCPOA, promote regional peace and development and boost people-to-people contacts with Iran in concert with the new US administration. Taken together, these steps would amount to a renewed transatlantic diplomatic agenda through which the United States and European allies can stabilize the nuclear file and then build on the resulting diplomatic momentum to address other concerns with Iran.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Transatlantic Relations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
82. Prospects for European and U.S. Policy toward Iran
- Author:
- Ariane Tabatabai and Edgar P. Tam
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
- Abstract:
- President Donald Trump’s views on Iran have centered on dismantling the landmark nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was agreed in 2015. He made it clear early on that he believed he could negotiate a better deal with Iran that would not compromise the interests of the United States as much and that would also address far more issues of concern to its partners in the Middle East. However, to date the Trump administration has not come any closer to achieving this goal. Instead, the United States and Iran have come close to war. Although European countries share objectives on Iran with the United States—for instance, limiting Iran’s ballistic-missile activities and seeking its return to compliance with its nuclear commitments under the JCPOA—they disagree strongly with President Trump’s approach to achieving these. His approach has made Washington the proverbial bull in a china shop for U.S allies in Europe, forcing them to put on hold long-desired objectives such as expanding economic ties with Iran and bringing it closer into a community of responsible stakeholders. Therefore, the result of the U.S. presidential election will have a significant impact on Europe’s relations with the United States when it comes to dealing with Iran. There are several ways in which a Trump reelection could affect Europe’s calculations. A second Trump administration that maintains a hard-line policy toward Iran would lead Europe to double down on encouraging Iran to negotiate by offering incentives as a demonstration of its good faith to Washington. Alternatively, no longer having to think about his reelection, Trump may pursue a less hard-line approach to secure negotiations, thus solidifying his presidential legacy. Germany and France in particular might seek additional leverage to temper and perhaps even counter Trump’s hard-line Iran policy to limit what they view as the damage caused by his administration. For its part, the United Kingdom may align more with the United States, causing a rupture in European unity. However, a “hybrid” scenario is most likely, in which Europe would continue its attempts to be perceived as independent while seeking a greater role in leading a quiet international effort to get Iran back in compliance with the JCPOA and at the negotiating table. If Joe Biden becomes president, he would return the United States to the JCPOA if Iran returned to compliance—which Europe also wants—while trying to negotiate additional commitments from Tehran on other areas of concern, such as missile testing and U.S. hostages. If this plan is complicated by the Trump administration’s pursuit of a unilateral sanctions snapback before it leaves office, however, a Biden administration may find itself facing a scenario in which there is no JCPOA to rejoin. This could be further complicated by a withdrawal by Iran from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which it has threatened to do. Even if there is a change in U.S. administration, European countries would still have to overcome differences among themselves on many aspects of Iran policy. A post-Brexit Europe may see the United Kingdom more aligned with U.S. objectives than European ones and acting more as an occasional “+1” to a remaining E2 of France and Germany. European countries also disagree on how to approach Iran’s malign activities, such as terrorism—with Germany having outlawed all of Hezbollah’s activities while the United Kingdom, France, and other European countries distinguish between the organization’s ostensibly political arm and its militant wing. These intra-European divisions, despite the European Union trying to establish a united front, make it easier for Iran’s propaganda efforts to sow division among European countries and in the transatlantic relationship.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Elections, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Iran, and United States of America
83. Does Soleimani’s Death Matter? Findings from a 2019 Workshop
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Last year’s Washington Institute forum on post-Soleimani succession suggested that the IRGC would lose a unique coordinating capability and its most important totem once he left the scene. Last April, The Washington Institute held a closed-door roundtable to discuss the potential impact if Qassem Soleimani no longer commanded the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force. Governed by the Chatham House rule, participants discussed how succession might work in the Qods Force and what Iran would lose if Soleimani became permanently unavailable, reaching consensus on many key issues. Now that the commander is indeed gone, their conclusions can help policymakers navigate the stormy seas ahead, though some aspects of his importance remain a matter of heated debate.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Qassem Soleimani
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
84. Arab, Iranian, and Turkish Responses to President Trump’s Impeachment
- Author:
- Washington Institute Staff
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- A survey of how regional media outlets discussed the congressional impeachment process and its potential ramifications on the 2020 presidential election. Across the Middle East, the story of President Trump’s impeachment and subsequent acquittal received secondtier coverage compared to regional or local issues. Many Arabic-language websites and newspapers translated and republished Western articles as opposed to creating their own content on the issue, such as Al Jazeera publishing a translated version of a Guardian editorial. Moreover, the bulk of the articles just explained the facts or process of impeachment rather than expounding on its significance. Some celebrated the idea that there is a mechanism for peaceful removal of a leader. Most commented on the unlikelihood of Trump’s removal and how America is facing unprecedented polarization. Those articles that did offer their own editorial content were split on whether impeachment will help or hurt Trump’s election campaign. Publications in the Gulf states tended to portray impeachment as an act of “political vengeance” by Democrats against Trump, “who won despite their opposition” (Sky News Arabia). Most Gulf papers posited that Trump will ultimately benefit in the 2020 election “after proving his innocence before the Senate” (Al Seyassah). Yet Qatari coverage deviated from the general Gulf trend. For example, one Al Jazeera article asserted that the impeachment case against Trump “is simple, and established not only by officials speaking under oath, but by his own words and actions.” Egyptian newspapers were more split on how impeachment will affect the election. Anti-American outlets in Syria suggested it will hurt him, with Al Baath noting “all data indicate that Trump’s hope for a return to the White House have faded.” Lebanese publications tended to take a more neutral view. The Hezbollah-controlled newspaper Al Akhbar wrote that the prospect of impeachment weakening Trump’s electoral campaign “is similar to that of his potential main rival,” arguing that Joe Biden was also tainted by the process. Most Iranian media tended to copy Western sources, but two themes prevailed among outlets offering original content: portrayal of impeachment as a scandal that has tainted Trump’s presidential legacy, or neutral analysis of how impeachment may or may not harm his reelection chances. A few analytical pieces suggested that he might be able to transform the scandal into an asset for his campaign, since it may “lead to more popularity among the middle class.” While most Iranian articles leaned against Trump, few appeared to praise Democrats. Turkish articles generally depicted impeachment as a “gift” to Trump’s campaign. SETA, a think tank that supports President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, claimed that what “hasn’t killed Trump will make him stronger.” Sabah News, another pro-Erdogan source, wrote that impeachment will “unite Republican senators and members of the House of Representatives around him.”
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Media, News Analysis, Domestic Politics, and Donald Trump
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Arab Countries, North America, and United States of America
85. Centering Iraq Policy on Human Rights and Fair Elections Michael Knights
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- The surest way to counter Iran’s malign influence is to proactively focus on human rights issues that the new prime minister can actually affect, such as organizing free elections and preventing further violence against protestors. On February 1, a plurality of Iraqi parliamentary factions gave President Barham Salih the go-ahead to nominate Mohammed Tawfiq Allawi as the new prime minister-designate. The mild-mannered Shia Islamist nominee will now attempt to form and ratify his cabinet in the next thirty days. As he does so, political blocs will probably rally behind him while limiting his mandate to organizing early elections next year, having struggled through a long and fractious process to replace resigned prime minister Adil Abdulmahdi. For the first time since the dramatic events of the past two months, Iraqis and U.S. policymakers alike can catch their breath and consider their medium-term options.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Elections, Domestic Politics, and Protests
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
86. Establishing a Response Ratio for Iranian and Proxy Attacks
- Author:
- Michael Knights
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Enhancing deterrence and protecting Americans in Iraq and Syria requires a more formalized system for rationing out retaliatory strikes at the proper intensity, time, and place. When U.S. airstrikes targeted Kataib Hezbollah militia personnel and senior Iranian military figures on December 29 and January 3, they were releasing long-pent-up retaliation for a range of provocations by Iraqi militias. Yet while these powerful blows may have injected some caution into enemy calculations, such deterrence is likely to be a wasting asset. The most proximal trigger for the strikes—the killing of an American civilian contractor during Kataib Hezbollah’s December 27 rocket attack on the K-1 base in Kirkuk—was just one in a series of increasingly risky militia operations against U.S. facilities. Only good fortune has prevented more Americans from dying in attacks conducted since then, including January 8 (when Iranian ballistic missiles struck the U.S. portion of al-Asad Air Base, causing more than a hundred nonlethal traumatic brain injuries), January 26 (mortar strike on the dining hall at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad), January 31 (rockets fired at the U.S. site at Qayyarah West), February 10 (explosive device thrown at a U.S. logistical convoy south of Baghdad), and February 13 (rocket attack on U.S. site at Kirkuk). The United States has seemingly communicated to Tehran that it will strike Iraqi militias and Iranian targets if any Americans are killed, but this redline has opened up a dangerous gray zone in which Iran and its proxies are emboldened to continue their nonlethal attacks. Besides the fact that such high-risk attacks are destined to result in more American deaths at some point, they will also produce many more injuries if permitted to continue, as seen in the January 8 strike. More broadly, they will limit U.S. freedom of movement in Iraq and Syria, undermining the point of being there in the first place. This situation is unacceptable—the United States needs a way to deter such behavior even when attacks fall short of killing Americans. When faced with similar challenges in past decades, the U.S. military established reckoning systems that matched the punishment to the crime, with useful levels of predictability, proportionality, and accountability.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Assassination, and No-Fly Zones
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Syria, and United States of America
87. New Khamenei Speech Underlines the Importance of Popular Support for the Regime
- Author:
- Mehdi Khalaji
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Instead of focusing on Iran's missile retaliation or future threats, the Supreme Leader used his latest speech to extoll the virtues of public unity behind the regime’s revolutionary goals. On January 8, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei delivered his first public speech since the U.S. assassination of Qasem Soleimani and the subsequent Iranian missile strike on Iraqi bases housing American forces. As part of an address that touched on regional solidarity against the United States and other notable subjects, he spent considerable time claiming that Soleimani symbolized the Iranian people’s continued commitment to the revolution. In doing so, he indicated that popular support for the regime remains a crucial objective for Iran’s leaders, perhaps more so than issuing or acting on further military threats.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Domestic Politics, Qassem Soleimani, and Assassination
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
88. The Coronavirus in Iran (Part 2): Regime Culpability and Resiliency
- Author:
- Mehdi Khalaji
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Even as their lack of transparency worsens the public health crisis, the Supreme Leader and other officials have systematically gutted any civil society elements capable of organizing substantial opposition to such policies. Iran’s ongoing coronavirus epidemic has left the people with less reason than ever to trust the information and directives issued by their leaders. Part 1 of this PolicyWatch discussed the clergy’s role in aggravating this problem, but the state’s mistakes and deceptions have been legion as well. They include scandalous discrepancies between official reports after a period of denial that the virus had entered the country; a health system that was unprepared to deal with such a disease promptly and properly; and official resistance to implementing internationally recommended precautionary measures, such as canceling flights from China and quarantining the center of the outbreak. These decisions have sown widespread confusion about facts and fictions related to the virus, the most effective medically proven ways to control it, and the degree to which it is spreading throughout the country. As a result, an already restive population has become increasingly panicked about the future and angry at the state. Yet can the coronavirus actually bring down the regime? The harsh reality is that the state has left little space for opposition to organize around health issues, or any issues for that matter. Instead, it has sought to confuse the people and redirect their anger toward external enemies, even as its own policies contribute to the crisis.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Civil Society, Health, Public Health, and Coronavirus
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
89. The Coronavirus in Iran (Part 1): Clerical Factors
- Author:
- Mehdi Khalaji
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- The clergy’s ambitions for global Shia revolution made the city of Qom uniquely vulnerable to the disease, and their resistance to modern medical science weakened the state’s ability to combat its spread. On February 19, two days before the Iranian government officially announced the arrival of coronavirus, an infected businessman who had recently returned from China to Qom passed away. The location and timing of his death illustrate how the Shia holy city and the religious leaders and institutions who call it home have played an outsize role in the disease’s disproportionately rapid spread inside Iran compared to other countries. How did this situation come to pass, and what does it say about the current state of the clerical establishment, its relationship with the regime, and its alienation from large swaths of Iranian society? (Part 2 of this PolicyWatch discusses the regime's role in the outbreak and its resiliency to such crises.)
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Health, Religion, Shia, and Coronavirus
- Political Geography:
- China, Iran, Middle East, Global Focus, and United States of America
90. Who Is Esmail Qaani, the New Chief Commander of Iran’s Qods Force?
- Author:
- Ali Alfoneh
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- Given the IRGC’s recent restructuring, the Qods Force will likely see more continuity than change under Qaani, though his bureaucratic background is a far cry from Soleimani’s brand of charismatic, risky leadership. On January 3, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appointed Brig. Gen. Esmail Qaani as chief commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force, just hours after his predecessor, Qasem Soleimani, was killed by a U.S. drone strike. The new commander’s background and military activities are not nearly as well known as Soleimani’s, so taking a closer look at them can help determine whether and how the IRGC’s main extraterritorial branch might change under his leadership.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Qassem Soleimani, and Assassination
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
91. Reading Trump in Tehran
- Author:
- Mehdi Khalaji
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
- Abstract:
- A week after Donald Trump was elected president in November 2016, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei played coy, remarking, “I have no judgment on the American election...[Both parties have been] naughty toward us.” Of course, his true reaction was far more complex. On one hand, he saw in the president-elect—who had spoken much of disentangling U.S. forces from the Middle East—a prospect of decreased military pressure on his country. On the other, he heard Trump’s raw vitriol directed at Iran’s leadership and the nuclear deal crafted by President Obama. The eventual U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA demonstrated that the new president could back up his talk with punishing action. In this close analysis of statements by Khamenei and other Iranian leaders, former seminarian Mehdi Khalaji lays out the regime’s current views on President Trump and the United States. He shows that even after the American assassination of Qods Force chief Qasem Soleimani, Iranian leaders could be open to negotiating with Washington if they believe the regime’s existence depends on it.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Elections, and Donald Trump
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
92. Understanding EU-MENA Relations: Current and Changing Dynamics
- Author:
- Przemysław Osiewicz, Alex Vatanka, and Suzanne Kianpour
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- The relationship between the European Union and the Middle East is facing a critical period of change, given the changing leadership in key European Union bodies, rising tensions with regard to Iran, and increasing confrontation between the United States and Iran. The Middle East Institute is pleased to invite you to a conversation with MEI scholar Przemysław Osiewicz, who will discuss his recently released paper series on the impact of leadership changes in key EU bodies such as the EU high representative for foreign and security policy, the European Commission, and the European Council on EU-MENA relations. He will be joined by MEI Senior Fellow Alex Vatanka and moderator Suzanne Kianpour to explore divergences between the United States and the EU approaches in their policies toward Iran, internal divisions within the EU on engagement with Iran, the role of economic factors, and the future of the JCPOA.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Politics, Geopolitics, and Leadership
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, United States of America, and European Union
93. Turkey Is Building a Geopolitical Alliance Between Sunni and Shiite Islamists
- Author:
- Irina Tsukerman
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA)
- Abstract:
- The recent news about the involvement of Iranian diplomats in the murder of an Iranian dissident in Turkey sparked a flare of international interest from within the all-encompassing coronavirus pandemic coverage, largely thanks to unflattering comparisons with coverage of the Jamal Khashoggi murder in 2018 (which the Iranian press promoted with gusto). The relative lack of interest in the crime from within Turkey itself reflects Ankara’s willingness to consort with Shiite Islamists to its own advantage.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, National Security, Geopolitics, and Islamism
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Turkey, and Middle East
94. Implications of the Coronavirus Pandemic on the Stability of Iran and the Regional Situation
- Author:
- Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Polish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Iran’s official figures on cases and deaths from COVID-19 (the disease resulting from coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2) do not reflect the real scale of the pandemic in that country, which might be among the hardest hit in the world. The pandemic will deepen the economic crisis and disfunction of the state, becoming a challenge to Iran’s ruling elite. The regime might survive thanks to the security apparatus and, in parallel, continue its support of Shia militias in Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen, and the Syrian government. Only the succession of power after Ali Khamenei will be the real test of the coherence of the Iranian elite, and in case of disruption, it might result in the collapse of Iran’s theocracy.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Economics, Government, Health, Coronavirus, Pandemic, and Elites
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syrian Arab Republic
95. The Significance of Targeting Soleimani
- Author:
- Ophir Falk
- Publication Date:
- 05-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- American Diplomacy
- Institution:
- American Diplomacy
- Abstract:
- On January 3, 2020, American drone-launched missiles killed Major General Qassem Soleimani shortly after his landing at Baghdad International Airport in what may turn out to be the most significant targeted killing of the 21st century to date.[i] While it is too early to determine the long-term implications and effectiveness of this operation, there is no question that the US action showed it will hold Iran accountable for terrorist actions.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Qassem Soleimani, and Assassination
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
96. The Iraqi and Kurdish Regional Government’s Sinjar Agreement: Consequences for U.S., Turkish, and Iranian Influence and Rebel Rivalries
- Author:
- Rami Jameel
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Jamestown Foundation
- Abstract:
- On October 9, the Iraqi government headed by Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi and the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) signed the “Sinjar Agreement” to normalize the situation in the war-torn district of Sinjar in northern Iraq. The agreement stated that only Iraqi federal forces should operate in Sinjar and all other armed groups must leave the town. It also gave the KRG a say on establishing a new local government, including appointing a new mayor, and planning and running reconstruction efforts in Sinjar, including related budgetary matters (Rudaw, October 10).
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, Non State Actors, Kurds, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, and United States of America
97. Iran's Influence in the Middle East
- Author:
- Jadranka Polovic
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
- Abstract:
- The Middle East as one of the most heterogeneous and politically conflicting regions in the world and has long been at the center of international interest. Faced with sectarian wars and comprehensive social crises for decades the Middle East, due to its geostrategic importance and especially the imperative of controlling the region’s vast energy resources, has once again become a battle ground for major powers whose interests affect the concentration of participants in the region. The competition between global powers and growing influence of Russia and China, who undermine the US power and European Union’s influence and also undermine established alliances in the Middle East, undoubtedly require a rethinking of Western strategies for the region. A series of geopolitical challenges, especially after September 11 attacks against the United States, as a result of military interventions and civil wars (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria) and uprisings (Arab Spring) and thus the collapsed regional order, confronted the international community with the changing nature of security threats, as well as with the new balance of power of regional and international actors in the Middle East. Among the many aspects of the Middle East conflicts, the fundamental issue of regional security today is the Sunni-Shiite conflict, which has since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 directly defined the approaches and policies of great powers and significantly changed regional dynamics. In this context, Iran’s role is particularly significant. Namely, over the last two decades, Iran has consolidated its goals in the Persian Gulf and strategically expanded its influence to other countries in the Middle East, primarily Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. The growing influence of Shiite Iran, and its close relations with Shiite communities in the region with which it forms a strategic coalition, have become a key geopolitical challenge for the international community.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, Natural Resources, and Hegemony
- Political Geography:
- Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Asia, North America, and United States of America
98. Coronavirus: An Ethical Question in the US-Iran Showdown
- Author:
- Ali Akbar Dareini
- Publication Date:
- 03-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Al Jazeera Center for Studies
- Abstract:
- Coronavirus is killing Iranians, so does Trump by waging a campaign of economic and medical terrorism. Its refusal to lift the sanctions exacerbates the already-tense relations between Tehran and Washington and pushes Iran to redefine its foreign policy.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Health, Sanctions, Economy, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, and United States of America
99. A Thick Cloud in the US-Iran Climate
- Author:
- Ali Akbar Dareini
- Publication Date:
- 02-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Al Jazeera Center for Studies
- Abstract:
- Neither Iran nor the United States want a full-fledged military war but the Trump administration’s campaign of “maximum pressure” and Soleimani’s assassination mean the two foes remain on collision course.
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Qassem Soleimani
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
100. After Qassem Soleimani: The Islamic Republic’s Strategy for the Arab World
- Author:
- Tarek Osman, Ariane Tabatabai, Morad Vaisibiame, and Alex Vatanka
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Middle East Institute (MEI)
- Abstract:
- The January assassination of Qassem Soleimani shocked the leadership in Tehran. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had not expected the United States to escalate tensions between the two countries in such a manner. The assassination of Soleimani was an effort to change Tehran’s strategic calculations and policies for the Middle East. With continued sanctions imposed by the United States, regional tension, and the loss of a key decision maker, Iran is facing intensified challenges to achieve its goals at home and in the region. The Middle East Institute (MEI) is pleased to welcome a group of experts to assess Iranian policy towards the Arab world following the death of Soleimani and to discuss how Arab states are reacting to Iran’s actions. How has Iran’s strategy in the Arab world performed following Soleimani’s death? In what ways have proxy forces in the Middle East that operate under Tehran’s command been affected? Who is left to make key decisions about the Islamic Republic’s involvement in the Arab states, and are we faced with a weaker IRGC Quds force after Soleimani? Finally, what do Arabs think of Iranian policies aimed at them?
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Qassem Soleimani, Assassination, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC), and Regional Power
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, Arab Countries, and United States of America