Lebanon

Despite long-documented public weariness with Middle East conflicts, Trump’s successor could well recognize the value of reestablishing American credibility in the region.

As demonstrators rail against economic problems, corruption, and sectarianism, the group’s role in undermining the public’s financial and physical security is coming under greater scrutiny.

Publicizing IDF operations, threatening to annex the West Bank, and making alarmist statements about polling stations and the press may help him eke out a victory, but at what cost to Israel’s security and standing?

With the IDF seemingly expanding its missile hunt to Lebanon and Iraq, the actions of Iran’s proxies, their host governments, and U.S. officials will do much to determine if wider escalation is in the cards.

Serious change is required to avoid decisions that accommodate Hezbollah’s ends, ways, and means, and a vital first step is to look at current policy mechanics with a clear eye.

If hostilities break out with the United States, Tehran may try to minimize risk to its most important assets in the Middle East by drawing on black ops units further abroad instead.

On the anniversary of the 2006 conflict, a former IDF chief of staff assesses current power dynamics, risks, and opportunities along Israel’s northern borders.

The slow but steady progress in developing offshore gas fields is transforming local economies and could underpin U.S. peace plans.

The Taif Accord, which ended Lebanon’s civil war almost three decades ago, stipulated that the country’s president be Christian, the prime minister be Sunni, and the parliament speaker be Shia. Today, two of these figures—President Michel Aoun and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri—are in their eighties, and both demonstrate sympathy for Hezbollah, the Shia militia and party that serves as a national power broker.