All Policy Analysis by مایکل آیزنستات

Fears of an “all-out” war with Iran have been greatly overstated, and they fail to account for the Islamic Republic’s overriding desire to avoid such an outcome and the diverse repertoire it has developed to prevent one.

U.S. and Israeli experts assess the quickly evolving situation as the IDF continues striking targets across the country, Tehran retaliates with missile salvos, and the international community mulls how best to contain the crisis.

A compilation of analyses on the military and nuclear impact of Israel’s initial strikes, Tehran’s response options, the Trump administration’s next steps, public reactions inside Iran, and more.

Washington Institute experts discuss what challenges must be addressed in negotiating a new nuclear deal or, failing that, planning a military campaign to degrade or destroy the program.

Should a negotiated deal prove elusive, policymakers will need to consider how to define a successful strike, Iran’s potential responses, and whether a strategy of prevention can be sustained.

Despite questions about the utility of its huge missile arsenal—whose importance has only increased since the collapse of the “axis of resistance”—Iran will likely double down on this capability to ensure the viability of its military strategy.

The decision would require tradeoffs affecting the security, survivability, and military credibility of Tehran's nascent arsenal.

Although recent military setbacks have fueled Iranian talk about a possible nuclear breakout, uncertainty about the risks, costs, and utility of weaponization may give the United States leverage to ensure that Tehran continues to hedge.

Experience shows that a balanced strategy blending deterrence by denial and deterrence by punishment can more effectively contain Iran.

A more rigorous understanding of how political and strategic cultures interact to affect the conduct of states could aid intelligence analysts and policymakers.

The goal of destroying Hamas will require a prolonged military effort, but the longer the fighting drags on, the less likely Israel will be to retain the freedom of action needed to achieve its war aims.

آمریکا باید بر خطراتی که گسترش جنگ دربر دارد تأکید کند و تهران را به مهار نیروهای نیابتی و شرکایش ترغیب کند.

Policymakers need to stay focused on halting the regime’s fissile material buildup while undertaking a broader, longer-term effort to shape its assessment of the risks, costs, and utility of nuclear weapons.

Iran’s future military activities will likely be marked by greater continuity than change, but Supreme Leader Khamenei’s succession could presage more risk-acceptant behavior and a reconsideration of its nuclear hedging strategy.

تمایل تهران به توقف برخی از ابعاد برنامه هسته‌ای‌ به خاطر استراتژی کاهش ریسک می‌تواند فرصت‌هایی ایجاد کند که بتوان از نگرانی‌های رژیم درباره هزینه‌های بالقوه حرکت‌ رو به جلو بهره‌برداری کرد.

رزمایش نظامی بزرگ و ترکیبی هفته گذشته با هدف اطمینان‌بخشی به دوستان و بازدارندگی دشمنان انجام شد، اما هر دو هدف در نهایت به ترمیم سیاست معیوب در قبال ایران بستگی خواهد داشت.

به ‌رغم موانع بر سر گسترش روابط دو طرف، مساعدت روسیه می‌تواند به تهران در سرکوب داخلی و بی‌ثبات‌سازی در خارج یاری رساند؛ پس آمریکا و متحدانش هر جا که ممکن باشد باید در پی بازداری این‌گونه همکاری باشند.

سه کارشناس در این موضوع بحث می‌کنند که چگونه واشنگتن ممکن است به‌ شکل عملی ایران را از تلاش برای کسب سلاح‌های هسته‌ای دور کند.

تهران شاید حضور پرزیدنت بایدن در اجلاس سران شورای همکاری خلیج فارس را فرصتی وسوسه‌انگیز برای ممانعت از احیای روابط آمریکا و کشورهای عربی این منطقه ببیند ‌ــ‌احتمالا با استفاده از تحریکات سایبری یا نظامی برای تحقیر میزبانان و نمایش ناتوانی آمریکا در محافظت از آنان.

There are more effective, less costly, and more sustainable ways to deter Tehran and shape its behavior than back-to-back deployments of carrier strike groups to the Gulf.