All Policy Analysis by David Schenker

Join us for a live webcast as scholars examine the potential future course of U.S. policy toward Syria following President Trump's meeting with that country's interim president Sharaa during his recent Gulf trip. Watch live starting at 11:00 a.m. EDT (1500 GMT) on Wednesday, May 21, 2025.

In this third of several daily videos from Washington Institute scholars, David Schenker examines the implications of discussions at the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Riyadh on the second day of President Trump's May 2025 trip to the Gulf region.

With the group and its Iranian patrons at their weakest point in decades, Beirut has a real opportunity to restore its sovereignty, but waiting for another futile “national dialogue” may close that window.

The agreement has withstood all challenges so far, thanks in large part to the mechanism that Israel and the United States set up to ensure Hezbollah's southern assets are addressed—one way or another.

Israel’s cross-border incursion is understandable but may have gone too far, raising the need for U.S. intercession on merging Syria’s disparate forces, easing sanctions, deconflicting with Turkey, and other urgent stabilization tasks.

What do Palestinians, Israelis, and external players see as the best option for Gaza and its people now that the first phase of the ceasefire is complete?

Despite well-founded worries about the rise of an Islamist government in Syria, the new rulers cannot be any worse than the previous regime—especially now that they are largely disarmed and disinclined to partner with U.S. adversaries like Iran and Russia.

Baghdad has good reason to be concerned about the relationship’s trajectory, but that doesn’t mean Washington should proceed with troop withdrawals just yet.

Under heavy pressure from the Trump administration, the Arab states with the most to gain—and lose—in Gaza should be spending the next two weeks doing everything they can to reach consensus on bold, concrete counter-proposals.

The new president and prime minister do not have a strong track record of confronting Hezbollah, but Washington should still be bold in supporting their stated commitments to reform, disarmament, and economic recovery.

Choosing a reform-minded president would be a good first step, but absent a concerted effort to consolidate the setbacks to Hezbollah, the organization will simply reassert its murderous grip.

The Hashd may already be deterred somewhat by recent events, but Trump will likely seek to maintain the pressure by withholding annual military assistance to Baghdad.

Four experts discuss the agreement’s detailed security provisions, the prospects for successful implementation, and the potential impact on other regional players.

Despite the wartime rancor, the peace treaty continues to deliver invaluable economic and security dividends to both states.

Absent a policy shift in Beirut, Lebanon will remain a satrapy of Iran, and the current window of opportunity to eradicate the Hezbollah threat will close.

Israel’s campaign has greatly diminished Hezbollah, presenting a chance for Beirut to end the war and push back against the group and its Iranian sponsors—if Lebanese elites are up to the task.

Three former U.S. officials discuss the challenges—and opportunities—that will greet the next administration in year two of the post-October 7 era.

With prospects low for a near-term diplomatic breakthrough, the Lebanese group can decide how far this conflict escalates.

In addition to addressing each country’s concerns about border sovereignty, smuggling, and other irritants, Washington should emphasize the longer-term need to return to the peace treaty’s military limitations after the Gaza war.

As the war in Gaza seemingly winds down, the old rules no longer apply in the north.