China has perfected the role of concerned onlooker as the Middle East conflict spreads across the region.
By attacking Iran without clear objectives or an exit strategy, the US and Israel turned what was the greatest strategic and chronic threat to regional security into an unpredictable set of imminent dangers. A fundamental task for US national security is to prevent this conflict from becoming a vortex that increasingly pulls in other powers.
Disarmament is necessary in Gaza. It is the only way to realize the goals articulated in the internationally endorsed 20-point plan laid out by the Trump administration. But a policy approach that makes disarmament a prerequisite for action on governance, recovery, freedom of movement for Gazans, and any credible political horizon is structurally and strategically counterproductive.
The balance of power in the Middle East is shifting. Iran is on the defensive — its military capabilities were badly degraded by last year’s 12 days of Israeli and US strikes, and growing protests at home have made the regime look more vulnerable than it has in years.
With the Iranian regime weakened by relentless American and Israeli missiles, Washington is eyeing a familiar U.S. ally in the Middle East to help push the Islamic Republic over the edge: the Kurds.
The recent escalation of the Pakistan-Afghanistan conflict upends China’s westward economic expansion. With neither Pakistan nor Afghanistan willing to subordinate their core security objectives to Beijing’s connectivity agenda, will China find itself unable to push forward on its regional strategy? US academic John Calabrese ponders this quandary.
Today’s decision taken by the Lebanese government — to declare all of Hizballah’s security and military activities illegal — is a landmark development. But how the government and the Lebanese Armed Forces implement this directive now that a new round of attacks has actually taken place will be the ultimate test of their credibility.
On February 28, the US and Israel launched coordinated military strikes on Iran. MEI defense experts weigh in on the military and regional consequences.
As the third and seemingly decisive round of talks in Geneva concluded, the Trump administration had avoided diplomatic deadlock — but only by narrowing negotiations to the nuclear file.
The latest cycle of U.S.-Iran escalation has followed a familiar script: sharpened rhetoric from the United States, calibrated military signaling by Iran in the Persian Gulf, indirect diplomacy through Oman, and Israeli warnings that remain deliberately ambiguous but unmistakably real. Yet beneath this choreography lies a more consequential development inside Tehran. The current crisis is forcing Iran’s political class to reassess its central foreign-policy wager of the past decade: that deepening alignment with Russia and China would provide strategic insulation against Western coercion.
Against the backdrop of one of the largest US military deployments to the Middle East since 2003, MEI Senior Fellow Alex Vatanka joins hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj to assess the situation inside Iran on the eve of potential war. Weeks after the Islamic Republic’s brutal crackdown on anti-government protesters and as negotiations with the US fail to find common ground, Donald Trump is reportedly weighing options for military action against Iran. Vatanka breaks down the regime’s strategic calculus, the current dynamics of Iran’s opposition movement, and the likely domestic political consequences of a military strike.
Saudi Arabia has stepped up its efforts to unify and restructure Yemen’s anti-Houthi forces after the rapid expansion and sudden implosion of the United Arab Emirates-backed secessionist Southern Transitional Council following Abu Dhabi’s military withdrawal from the country.
US President Donald Trump takes to the podium tonight to deliver the first State of the Union address of his second term.
“It’s going to be a long speech because we have a lot to talk about,” Trump said ahead of the address. The State of the Union—an annual speech delivered by the US president to Congress—typically focuses heavily on domestic policy issues, and that’s likely to be the case with tonight’s speech as well. Concerns about the health of America’s economy and growing public controversy about the Trump administration’s immigration policies are two of the domestic policy issues Trump will likely address.
The United States’ rapid military buildup across the Gulf has triggered a familiar anxiety in Tehran, but the Iranians’ reading of American intentions has grown sharper and more layered than at any point in recent years.
Hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj are joined by MEI Senior Fellow Natan Sachs to discuss Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s February 11 visit to the White House, Israel’s anxieties surrounding the ongoing US-Iran talks, and the domestic political dynamics Netanyahu is operating under. Taylor, Czekaj, and Sachs unpack what Netanyahu hoped to achieve during the visit, particularly regarding Iran, and what his relationship with President Donald Trump can tell us about the relative coordination and policy alignment between the US and Israel. They also examine Netanyahu’s political standing at home, two and half years since the October 7 attacks, as the 2026 election campaign begins in Israel. Finally, Sachs assesses what lies ahead for Israeli politics.