Research & Commentary Results

Originally posted November, 2011

Ravaged, intimidated, and gutted to the core in a series of purges after the 1979 Revolution, the remnant of the Shah’s military, renamed the Army of the Islamic Republic of Iran, known generally in Persian as the Artesh, put itself together as best as it could to face invading Iraqi forces at the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war.

Iran’s conventional military forces — ground, air, and naval — once stood tall as the best armed military forces in the Middle East aside from those of Israel.  The United States lavished the most sophisticated military hardware on the Shah, who was willing and able to tap his financial resources from Iran’s oil wealth to buy modern conventional arms.  The Shah had the ambition, the financial means, and the political-military backing of the United States to turn Iran into the Persian Gulf’s most formidable military power.  

United States military forces use standard procedures for planning operations against other militaries.  These procedures differentiate between different branches, or units, of an opposing force depending on their capabilities and limitations.  This article presents one such analysis of the Iranian Military, where there are vast differences between the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)and the Artesh, or the regular Iranian armed forces.  The article then draws parallels to the planning for Operation Iraqi Freedom that led to the defeat of the Iraqi Republican Guard and regular Iraqi

As the United States and its allies have tightened sanctions on Iran, they have sought in particular to isolate the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the regime’s most aggressive institution. The IRGC, known in Persian as the Pasdaran, fields its own army, navy, and air force, and dominate a large and increasing share of Iran’s national economy.

Iran’s regular military, the Artesh, receives virtually no attention from international media or scholars on Iran. By contrast, its political rival, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC, also known in Persian as the Pasdaran), is scrutinized constantly by analysts for its visible, high-profile role in Iran’s political system, its economic resources and corporate activities, and its role as a spearhead of Iran’s regional policies.

As the US-Iran showdown continues, among Western analysts there is an infinite desire for more data and analysis relating to the workings of the Islamic Republic. From a US standpoint, a better understanding of the various organs and players in the Iranian regime setup is imperative as Washington weighs its options and sets out to formulate its policies.

MEI scholar Randa Slim led a discussion about Hezbollah and its reaction to shifting regional dynamics in the wake of the Arab Spring. Although Lebanon has not experienced the same levels of unrest as its neighbors, Hezbollah is not immune from the regional instability resulting from the revolutions roiling the Middle East. Hezbollah is currently the principal orchestrator of a new governing coalition that is rife with internal divisions.

The Middle East Institute is proud to host a discussion with Trita Parsi and Michael Singh on the prospects for a diplomatic solution to the Iran nuclear crisis in the wake of recently imposed UN and US sanctions.

Their discussion will draw upon a forthcoming Middle East Journal article entitled "The Case Against the Case Against Iran" written pseudonymously by a European diplomat, who argues for greater engagement by regional actors like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China to mediate and mitigate Iran's nuclear ambitions.

The Middle East Institute is proud to host Syria experts Ammar Abdulhamid, Helena Cobban, and Steven Heydemann for a discussion about the ongoing protests in Syria and the international and regional reactions to the shifting Syrian landscape. As the uprising continues into its third month, how sustainable is the protest movement? Are the Syrian government's tactics in crushing dissent succeeding? What impact has the violence had on the Assad regime's relationship with its neighbors like Turkey and close allies like Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas?

Various Track Two approaches to peacebuilding in the Middle East have been pursued through ecumenical dialogue and educational programs such as The University of the Middle East Project.[1] Yet the direct use of environmental conservation as a mutually agreeable way to approach territorial conflict resolution has thus far not been seriously deliberated. Some “realists” might be dismissive of such a prospect, but the concept of “peace parks” has shown practical promise in resolving territorial disputes.

Environmental peacebuilding is both the theory and practice of identifying environmental initiatives that promote a sustainable peace between those who have previously been adversaries, and implementing those initiatives. Environmental peacebuilding combines two elements.

The Arava Institute for Environmental Studies (AIES) is the premier environmental studies institute in the Middle East and is accredited under the auspices of the Ben Gurion University (BGU) of the Negev. Since 1996, the Institute has been teaching environmental studies to university students from the Middle East and other parts of the world. The unique approach of the Institute is to teach the environment, in which all share, as a bridge to cooperation and peacebuilding in the Middle East.

Israeli politics is notable for its wide array of parties and unstable coalition governments. The main institutional cause of this chronic instability is the system of nationwide proportional representation, which gives disproportionate influence to minor parties. This instability limits the ability of Israeli governments to pursue coherent long-term strategies and leads to policies that address the concerns of minority groups at the expense of the national interest.

Originally posted November 2010