Prospects for U.S.-Iran Relations on the Nuclear Issue in the Year Ahead
Principal Authors: Allen Keiswetter and Roby Barrett
Contributing MEI Scholars and Guests:
Geneive Abdo, Reza Akbari, Roby Barrett, Charles Dunne,Philip Frayne, George Harris, Mark N. Katz (George Mason University), Allen Keiswetter, David Mack, Melissa Mahle (C&O Resources), Richard Murphy, Greg Myre, Michael Ryan, Paul Scham, Daniel Serwer, Alex Vatanka, Marvin Weinbaum, Wayne White, Philip Wilcox, Molly Williamson
America's Catch-22: The Iran Question in Afghanistan
This Opinion first appeared in Frontline.com’s Tehran Bureau on June 13, 2012 and was co-authored by Christina Lin
As U.S. and other NATO troops prepare to leave Afghanistan in 2014, a geopolitical realignment will be under way in Southwest Asia. One possible scenario would outright undermine a principle U.S. policy objective in the region: the containment of Iran.
This Opinion first appeared on CNN.com on May 21, 2012
Iran is set for nuclear talks Wednesday with members of the U.N. Security Council, and the Obama administration, as well as some Iranian and European Union officials, expressed optimism that a compromise will be reached. But it is useful to examine Israel’s long-term objectives for a bit of a reality check.
Understanding Iran’s foreign policy is the key to crafting sensible and effective policies toward Iran and requires, above all, a close analysis of the profound cultural and psychological contexts of Iranian foreign policy behavior.
The Middle East Institute is proud to host Georgetown University professor Paul Pillar for a discussion about Iran and how best to address its nuclear ambitions. Pillar argues that the acceptable range of opinion on Iran has narrowed around the idea that all options, including a military strike, must be pursued to prevent the country from acquiring nuclear weapons. And yet, Pillar argues, if the combination of nuclear talks and sanctions do not yield the outcome the West and Israel seek, containment is preferable to war.
