Research & Commentary Results

A fragile cease-fire between Lebanon and Israel is barely holding as military delegations from both countries arrive in Washington for a new round of direct talks scheduled for this Friday. But diplomatic success could mean new strategic opportunities for the Lebanese nation. Guest host and MEI Senior Fellow Brian Katulis is joined by Lebanese Member of Parliament Fouad Makhzoumi to unpack the challenges facing the Lebanese government today, Hizballah’s influence over state institutions, and what all of this means for the country’s future. Makhzoumi also reflects on his personal journey and what inspired him to transition from business to politics in an effort to help shape a better life for his granddaughters in Lebanon.

The news from Lebanon reads like a litany of loss. Since the war began more than two months ago, not only have 2,882 people been killed and 8,768 wounded, according to Lebanon’s Health Ministry, but once again multiple heritage sites — especially those in the south — have been damaged and destroyed. Indeed, Lebanese heritage, inexorably linked to its peoples, shares in their vulnerability and suffering.

Despite efforts to extend the cease-fire in Lebanon and disarm Iranian proxy Hizballah, fighting continues between the militant group and Israeli forces. Hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj are joined by MEI Senior Fellow Fadi Nicholas Nassar to examine what the renewed fighting means for attempts to counter Iranian influence in Lebanon and what could lie ahead. They discuss the prospects for a lasting agreement, Iran’s broader proxy strategy, and how Washington can help strengthen the sovereignty of the Lebanese state.

President Donald Trump has an opportunity to do something no American president has managed in nearly half a century: end the war between Israel and Lebanon for good.

Last Thursday, the US announced a 10-day cease-fire “to enable peace negotiations between Israel and Lebanon”. The State Department statement – reportedly agreed to by both governments – marked a significant diplomatic shift. It included an affirmation that “the two countries are not at war,” a commitment to work toward “full recognition of each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” as well as “achieving a permanent agreement that ensures lasting security, stability, and peace.”

As Lebanese, Israeli, and American teams prepare for their first-ever trilateral leaders summit, it is time to reflect on this opportunity and lessons from the past.

Hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj are joined by MEI Distinguished Diplomatic Fellow Amb. (ret.) Robert S. Ford to examine what is at stake for Iraq in the Iran war. The only country to have been hit by both sides, Iraq is caught in the middle of a regional conflict, with the local Iranian-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) carrying out attacks on American interests and personnel — and the US responding. This escalation comes at a period of internal political transition in Iraq, which has been locked in negotiations to form a new government since the November 2025 elections. Ford, who served as Deputy and later Acting Ambassador in Baghdad from 2008 until 2010, unpacks how Iraq is navigating the current moment, how the Kurdistan region fits into this equation, and what this all means for the future of US-Iraqi relations.

The following study discusses the role of Lebanon’s gold reserves in the establishment of a currency board and evaluates four policy options: a true currency board, constrained central bank reform, full dollarization, and a unified managed float. Gold reserves are relevant under all four. The conclusion is consistent across them: no monetary framework, however carefully designed and however well backed, can substitute for the prior political decision on who bears Lebanon’s losses and how the state will finance itself sustainably.

Israel’s escalating campaign against Iran-backed Hezbollah is rapidly turning Lebanon into one of the most unstable fronts in the wider US-Israel confrontation with Iran — pushing an already fragile state to the brink. The war is tearing at Lebanon’s sectarian and political fabric, displacing Shiite communities and deepening polarization between Hezbollah and its rivals.

With the Strait of Hormuz closed and oil production from Iraq’s south in free fall, Baghdad’s failure to maximize the Iraq-Turkey Pipeline is no longer a policy dispute. It is a national emergency.

Operation Epic Fury has created a dramatic opportunity in Lebanon that the US cannot afford to miss. Sustained leadership and support for the Lebanese Armed Forces can result in real disarmament, eliminating Hizballah as an Iranian proxy, and dealing Tehran another massive defeat that would further undermine the Iranian regime and help bring about its collapse.

Once again, Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, have dragged Lebanon into a war. But there are differences today. These differences are a cause for hope.

Hosts Alistair Taylor and Matthew Czekaj are joined by MEI Senior Fellow Fadi Nicholas Nassar to discuss Hizballah’s role in the escalating conflict in the Middle East and the implications for Lebanon. A day after the United States and Israel launched a joint military campaign against Iran, Tehran’s Lebanese proxy fired missiles at northern Israeli territory. Israel responded swiftly and forcefully, and Lebanon’s government and population now fear the Iranian-backed militia is dragging the country back into war. The conversation explores the broader repercussions of Hizballah’s actions against the backdrop of a widening war in Iran and Lebanon’s quickly evolving political climate. Nassar also outlines recommendations for how Lebanon can move forward as a sovereign and effective state.

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.

Media and politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are hyping the idea that President Trump’s attempt to gain sovereign control of Greenland has caused unprecedented and irreparable damage to the over 75 year-old Transatlantic Alliance.  This “analysis” stems from multiple sources.  On both sides of the ocean, there are those who pounce on any deviation from the norm by Trump as evidence the world as we know it is ending. And in Europe, there is the human but unattractive reaction of weak, dependent states against their one powerful ally when it rejects Europe’s preferred script. Much of the US media criticism is summarized by the concept that our other NATO allies can never again “trust” the US.