Six factors shaping Trump’s calculus on Iran
From a US military build-up in the region to Trump’s growing unpopularity at home, several factors could influence his decision on whether or not to attack.
From a US military build-up in the region to Trump’s growing unpopularity at home, several factors could influence his decision on whether or not to attack.
Whether the truce between Damascus and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces holds or collapses will have major implications for neighboring Turkey, which has long-standing interests in Syria, but recent developments already point to a win for Ankara.
The question facing international oil companies is not whether Libya has oil and gas to develop. It does. The question is whether the country’s current political, economic, and security conditions allow that potential to be converted into reliable returns — and whether near-term changes could alter that calculation.
Brian sits down with Behnam Taleblu, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, to unpack the ongoing protests in Iran and what this moment reveals about the long struggle between the state and the street. They discuss the regime’s brutal crackdown, the prospect of US intervention, and what both could mean for the future of the Islamic Republic. The episode centers on agency, imagination, and the possibilities facing Iranians at a critical juncture in the country’s history.
One of Donald Trump’s achievements was to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza, even if an imperfect one.
The collapse of the Iranian regime in its present form now seems more plausible than its survival as a functioning state. Yet the emergence of a democratic Iran remains far from certain. Between these two outcomes lies a volatile and dangerous middle ground. But much will depend on four factors.
President Donald Trump has sharply warned the Iranian regime to halt its brutal crackdown on protesters. Amid speculation that the US is preparing for military action in Iran, Washington should take the lessons and fundamentally different context of its successful June 2025 operation against the Islamic Republic into account as it plans for how to respond.
People are not protesting because they suddenly discovered activism. They are protesting because the habits of coping and waiting for conditions to improve have finally stopped working.
Last week, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei effectively greenlit mass killing to save his regime. His message was blunt: blood would be spilled to preserve the system. His security forces followed through, unleashing a level of violence against protesters that even by the Islamic Republic’s grim standards marks a dangerous escalation.
After months of building tensions, full-blown hostilities erupted between Syria’s transitional government and militia fighters linked to the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Aleppo on January 6. Through four days of fighting, government forces have now assumed full control of Syria’s second city, after expelling SDF-linked forces from its northwestern districts.
America’s dramatic capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro has set the stage for the conduct of America’s national security strategy in 2026. It has also raised questions.
On Sunday, December 28, Iran’s latest wave of unrest began not on a university campus or in a symbolic political square, but in the very heart of the country’s economic sphere: the Grand Bazaar commercial center in downtown Tehran. What distinguishes the current moment is not simply the persistence of unrest but its emotional register. Iranian commentary increasingly describes not just hardship but a collapse of expectations of a better future.