Policy Analysis

This season of Decision Points tackles the toughest U.S. foreign-policy debates, from the brink of war in Iran to the painful aftermath in Gaza and the new government in Syria.

Setting aside the broader array of deep Western policy concerns about Iran—including its terrorism sponsorship, direct and proxy aggression against Israel and the Gulf states, and brutal violence against its own people—what nuclear terms would negotiators have to insist on to avoid the setbacks of the JCPOA process and keep the regime from acquiring nuclear weapons for the long term?

President Trump’s recent military adventures seem driven less by confidence and canny strategy than by fear of America losing status on the world stage, including in the Middle East.

Damascus will not take the difficult steps to reconcile internal animosities and rebuild destroyed infrastructure unless outside supporters—led by the United States—speak with one voice about their expectations and red lines.

Clear-eyed recounting and a detailed roadmap can give U.S. officials and the American public a better view of what security and governance measures the new Syrian government has taken so far, and what gaps and pitfalls remain in the path of lasting stability.

The security situation in the Gaza Strip is still tense after completing the first stage of President Trump’s peace plan, raising questions about how the parties will overcome the challenges of enforcing the ceasefire, disarming Hamas, transferring power, and launching reconstruction.

Concerns about the Uyghur file, investment risks, and other issues are still constraining the relationship to a certain extent, but fortifying those restraints will require Washington to exert further leverage on several fronts.

The NCAG’s viability will depend on producing quick, tangible deliverables, so the Trump administration, the Board of Peace, and the High Representative should stand ready to provide the requisite support on staving off Hamas and PA obstructionism and cutting through Israeli red tape.

The Trump administration needs to exert pressure on each of the “two Gazas,” pushing Hamas and its regional interlocutors on disarmament while pressing Israel to play a more constructive role and conduct phased withdrawals when merited.

U.S. envoys should be focused less on making a deal and more on how they can use the prospect of imminent military strikes to secure concessions on the nuclear issue, missile threats, treatment of protesters, and other matters.

The ongoing disarmament process is crucial, but completing it will be impossible without more attention to Hezbollah’s cash economy, judicial interference, political intimidation, and other elements of domestic power.

Meeting the moment requires greater investment and attention from Washington, including additional targeted security assistance, robust diplomatic efforts, expansion of the U.S. team tasked with handling the Lebanon file, and more.

No matter what President Trump may say about potentially securing “a good deal” from Iran, refraining from military action after weeks of dire U.S. warnings would likely convince Tehran that it can strike fear in other governments.

Besides the welcome symbolic value of taking action amid bloody regime crackdowns inside Iran, the designation gives multilateral law enforcement agencies and individual member states a powerful new tool set for limiting terrorist plots and criminal activity on their soil.

Russia has been quietly reconsolidating its military patronage, energy ties, and future business prospects in Syria for more than a year, but Washington has multiple options for countering Moscow’s long game.

Without electoral law modifications, sanctions against pro-Hezbollah elites, prosecutions for long-delayed cases like the port explosion, and other urgent measures, the group and its allies could wind up regaining their grip in Lebanon during the next round of nationwide voting.

Full Kurdish integration in Syria is one of the most important projects in the Middle East, but Washington must ensure it is accomplished without further violence, and without blowing the activities of various foreign players out of proportion.

Military strikes, stringent sanctions enforcement, and help for the opposition could sharpen the multiple crises that may eventually prove the regime’s undoing.

Decisive U.S. leadership is essential to resolve worsening differences between fellow Quad members, neutralize spoilers, and ensure that Sudanese civilians—not just armed factions—shape their country’s future.

Moscow has certainly not left the Middle East playing field, and many countries will continue expanding their Russian ties unless Washington convinces them there are better options.