Policy Analysis

Watch an expert webcast looking into the state of the Iranian regime and Iranian public opinion after twelve days of war with Israel.

Iranian Kurdish opposition groups remain committed to regime change in Iran, but external and internal factors contributed to the caution with which they approached the recent conflict.

The best way to bolster the Trump administration’s new “Quad” initiative is by combining it with a previous Saudi-American platform that already has significant buy-in from the warring parties.

Although international frustrations over the Gaza war were briefly placed on the back burner during the Iran crisis, they are boiling over once again and may spoil Washington’s postwar plans if left untended.

The objectives of Operation Midnight Hammer aligned with the broader U.S. goals of curbing Iranian threats and stabilizing the Middle East—but military force alone will not produce those outcomes.

From insisting on zero enrichment to making the ceasefire conditional, officials should ensure that any post-conflict negotiations with Tehran fully address U.S. policy imperatives, including the need to prevent reconstitution of the nuclear program.

Although Tehran’s current vulnerability presents important opportunities to counter Russia’s strategic ambitions, Moscow has long retained its influence in the region by purposefully avoiding overcommitment to any one partner.

Three experts explore the war’s impact on global energy markets, Iran-Gulf relations, President Trump’s oil price calculations, and more.

A compilation of views on the next round of prospective talks with Iran, sanctions relief options, military and technical considerations, the international role, and more.

Iraq is more stable than it has been in decades but still faces enormous security and energy challenges, including the risk of spillover from Iran-Israel hostilities, dependence on unreliable Iranian gas amid untapped domestic opportunities, an untested Syrian government, and the unrelenting Islamic State threat.

Israel and the United States bought themselves time on the nuclear issue, but the decision to take the military path raises a host of other risks and questions.

Israeli and American intelligence reached different conclusions while looking at the same information, so understanding what Jerusalem and Tehran were thinking before the war is crucial to forecasting what could come next.

Khazali finally reacted to the Iran-Israel conflict to avoid further embarrassing his militant base, underlining the difficulties of being a surface politician and a closet terrorist.

Two veteran U.S. officials join a former Israeli ambassador to discuss the effects and future consequences of the Trump administration’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear program.

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.

Although definitively identifying the group responsible for the bombing may take more time, authorities in Damascus and Washington already have more than enough information to beef up their security cooperation and reassure Syrian minorities that they won’t be targeted.

The president focused his first planned visit to the region on securing trillions of dollars in economic deals, but carrying these projects to completion while ensuring U.S. interests will require close, sustained oversight.

Although the crisis has not yet checked all the boxes that would signal fatal regime vulnerability, the situation could change quickly due to shifting conditions on the battlefield, on the streets, or within the halls of power in Tehran.

For regional countries seeking to transform their economies and partner with the United States in areas including AI, the current war poses risks that could reverberate in the global economy.

In the wake of retaliatory strikes on U.S. targets, a former Pentagon official assesses Tehran’s bad options and Washington’s best response.