Research & Commentary Results

On April 12, the United States and Iran wrapped up their first round of renewed diplomatic talks in Muscat, with round two set for April 19, in Rome. In the interim, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is in Moscow to coordinate with the Russians. But the real breakthrough will not come from nuclear talks alone — it will require confronting the region’s most explosive fault line: the Iranian-Israeli standoff. Russia claims it can help.

It is no surprise that both Iran and the United States have approached their first diplomatic engagement in four years with wariness. There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical about the probability of the negotiations culminating in a deal. But it would be a mistake to assume that the conditions in 2025 are the same as existed in 2015. Time is not on the Iranians’ side now and changes afoot in the Middle East and the broader global community give Iran an incentive to move toward an agreement, assuming that Washington is sincere and realistic in its negotiations with Tehran.

This article is published as part of the Perry World House workshop “U.S.-Iran Relations Under Trump 2.0: Lessons Learned and Likely Scenarios.”

The biggest development this past week in the Middle East policy of Trump’s second administration was the initiation of talks between the United States and Iran. This small sign of hope for diplomatic progress comes at a time when the administration continues to implement an assertive and unpredictable economic unilateralism that has roiled global markets and reduced trust and confidence between the United States and most close international partners. Brian Katulis unpacks three things to watch closely as Trump’s Iran policy evolves and his broader national security approach unfolds.

US President Donald Trump surprised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by publicly announcing “direct” talks between the United States and Iran set to take place later this week. The American president also unleashed global economic uncertainty by announcing simultaneous, unexpectedly high tariffs on dozens of countries around the world — including a 17% duty on Israel — and kicking off an escalating global trade war.

Climate variability is becoming a key factor in shaping economic stability, agricultural productivity, and water security worldwide. Periods of prolonged drought and sudden shifts in precipitation can have far-reaching consequences, particularly for countries that rely heavily on natural water sources for farming and economic growth. As weather patterns become increasingly unpredictable, there is a need to navigate both the immediate impacts of climate change and the long-term strategies needed for climate resilience. Finding the right balance between short-term relief and sustainable adaptation is a fundamental challenge for economies dependent on agriculture and water availability. Nowhere is this more evident than in Morocco.

President Donald Trump confirmed this week that he plans to travel to Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries later this spring. This visit will bring the region into sharper focus at a time when Trump’s priorities have focused closer to home and on his unique brand of economic warfare.

President Donald Trump is focused on realizing two transformative breakthroughs that his predecessors failed to accomplish: an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict, centered on a tripartite US-Saudi-Israeli deal, and an agreement between the US and Iran. Both would be historic achievements. So far, however, progress in each case has proven difficult and plodding.

President Masoud Pezeshkian might be the loneliest man in Iran. Just eight months into his term in office, he is already losing the support of those who once championed him. While the Iranian presidency is a thankless job, Pezeshkian is not helping his own case.

Iran is accumulating enough near-weapons-grade enriched uranium to build a nuclear weapon within weeks or months, not years. President Donald Trump, having withdrawn the United States in 2018 from the nuclear deal that would have postponed that possibility, is now appealing for negotiations with Tehran. But in the Middle East, the nuclear question does not concern only Iran.

Countries in North Africa and around the world are increasingly prioritizing a strict definition of sovereignty and tending toward transactional diplomacy. Understanding the motivations behind North Africa’s “sovereignty-first” approach can help the United States and Europe build mutually beneficial and durable links with the region in this new reality.

President Donald Trump’s administration dialed up its use of military power in the Middle East this past week just as it took more steps to dismantle American institutions central to advancing peace and stability through diplomacy.

After decades of managing tensions through careful balancing, Turkey and Iran now find themselves increasingly at odds following recent shifts in the regional balance of power. With Ankara emboldened and Tehran on its back foot after the fall of the regime of Bashar al-Assad, the struggle for influence between the two neighbors and long-time rivals is escalating in both Syria and Iraq and could spread well beyond their borders.

While most media attention was focused on its global economic policy moves, the Trump administration continued to keep the Middle East high on its agenda this past week, with the president sending a letter to Iran’s supreme leader and his team directly engaging with the Palestinian group Hamas. This continued engagement on the region’s top two strategic questions, Iran and Arab-Israel affairs, contrasted with America’s hands-off approach to Syria, which saw some troubling violence.

President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress on March 4 doubled down on his disruptive and contentious domestic policy agenda. Foreign policy, including Trump’s approach to the Middle East, was mostly an afterthought. Though he said little about Middle East policy in his speech, Trump’s team is taking an irregular approach on the twin issues of Israel-Arab ties and Iran that may not produce the stability and prosperity it seeks.