To abandon the Syria mission now would bring no meaningful benefit to the US, but it would swiftly and significantly empower America’s adversaries, like ISIS, Iran, Russia, and Assad’s regime.
As Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, the main question in Tehran is not so much what the incoming American president will do about Iran. Rather, it is about whether Tehran should negotiate with him.
The Middle East has experienced an extraordinarily tumultuous year, as the ripples from Hamas’ assault on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, continue to fuel hostilities in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and the waters of the Gulf. Amid all of this, Syria has received very little attention, despite its central role in Iran’s regional agenda. Now the Biden administration is reportedly “hopeful” that Bashar al-Assad will soon permanently block Iran’s ability to support Hezbollah in Lebanon and is postured to reward Damascus for doing so. At best, such calculations should be described as optimistic; at worst, fanciful.
Read MEI’s weekly briefing featuring expert analysis of key regional developments for the week ahead.
Under past reformist presidents, Iran repeatedly tried to build a grand bargain deal with the United States, entailing compromises over its nuclear program in return for negotiating spheres of influence across the Middle East. This September, speaking on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meetings in New York, the current reformist president Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed that he was open to direct talks with Washington to end hostilities.
The multiple wars that have erupted since Oct. 7, 2023, have already changed the strategic landscape in the Middle East — and more change is likely to follow.
it is possible to extrapolate how the incoming second Trump administration may respond to the complex situation in the Middle East by examining the president-elect’s record during his first term, what he has said since, as well as public statements of his running-mate, Sen. J. D. Vance. Two main issues are likely to dominate Donald Trump’s regional agenda when he comes to power: Iran and Israeli-Palestinian affairs.
Expert regional analysis by MEI scholars and contributors.
The following is a short abstract, offering the main analytical findings and policy takeaways from a newly released Middle East Institute report on post-war reconstruction in Syria.
Israel’s escalation of its military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon has severely disrupted the cross-border flow of goods into Syria that have long served as a critical lifeline for Damascus. These interruptions have worsened existing shortages, triggering sharp increases in the prices of essential commodities for Syrian who were already struggling economically.
Last week, representatives from around 70 countries convened in Paris to pledge nearly $1 billion in aid for Lebanon. Moving forward, France and the US should work together to summon the political will needed to craft and implement a lasting political solution — one that can effectively safeguard against future wars between Israel and Lebanon.
Read MEI’s weekly briefing featuring expert analysis of key regional developments for the week ahead.
This policy assessment examines the statements and positions staked out by the Harris and Trump campaigns on the Middle East. The spotlight is on the past few weeks, with a stronger focus on two main issues that are likely to dominate the regional agenda of the next US administration: Iran and Israeli-Palestinian affairs.
Over the past month, Iran and its regional network of allies and proxies – the Axis of Resistance – has suffered a string of dramatic losses and defeats. What is the future of the Axis and its members, and what can the US and its allies do to confront and disrupt this Iranian-led network?
MEI Managing Editor Matthew Czekaj speaks to Meir Javedanfar and Alex Vatanka on Iran’s role in keeping its network of proxies together and the conflicting interests that may force the country to rethink its antagonistic regional strategy.
Last month marked the second anniversary of the death of 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian Mahsa Amini and the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement born of her murder. The authorities’ subsequent brutal crackdown on the protesters is but one flagrant example of the government’s appalling human rights record. The regime’s disdain for international human rights norms is not the recent result of Iran’s transition from Islamic theocracy to nationalistic military-security state. Rather, it has been a feature of the regime from the beginning, as shown by (inter alia) the 1988 mass executions of Iranian prisoners.