Research & Commentary Results

Deadly fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces over the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh has continued unabated for over a month. This so-called “frozen conflict” on Russia’s periphery was never truly frozen. Unresolved grievances on both sides festered for almost three decades, and smaller skirmishes periodically erupted. But this time the fighting emerged as the largest and deadliest flare-up and even spilled into neighboring Iran. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s support for Azerbaijan played a decisive role in raising the scale and turning the tide in favor of Azerbaijan. Turkish involvement raises questions about Moscow’s role and expectations, and the broader Russia-Turkey relationship.

Since May 2019, a series of Syrian loyalist offensives backed by the Russian air force has gradually encroached upon the country’s northwestern Idlib Province, home to the last major pocket of opposition-held territory. As the chief rebel group in control of Idlib, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) has employed dozens of suicide car bombs as part of its continued defense of the area. Formally known as suicide vehicle-born improvised explosive devices (SVBIEDs), these weapons have been a cornerstone of the group’s — and by extension, the entire opposition’s — military strategy since early stages of the war, when rebel forces began capturing and holding territory. In an attempt to further understand this strategy and how it has evolved over time, this case study seeks to compare and contrast HTS’s past and current use of SVBIEDs, with a heavy focus on the latter. It will also examine HTS’s evolving SVBIED design, paying particular attention to technical innovations such as environment-specific paint schemes, drone support teams, tablets with target coordinates, and live camera feeds, as well as upgraded main charges.

The renewed military conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh between Azerbaijan and Armenia threatens geopolitical stability in the wider Black Sea-Caspian region, and has the potential to evolve into greater regional escalation. The scale of military operations, and range of heavy military equipment involved, is increasing risks for major energy and transportation infrastructure, which connect Caspian oil and natural gas fields in Azerbaijan to major energy markets in Turkey, the Mediterranean, and different parts of Europe.

The 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and conflict in the Eastern region of Donbas not only breached commitments made by Russia as a signatory of the Budapest Memorandum twenty years earlier, but also tested the ability of the U.S. and U.K to guarantee peace in Ukraine and hold the aggressor accountable for its malevolent actions.

Georgia has experienced the full spectrum of Russian aggression, from direct military action to covert subversion and proxy operations. Nonetheless, while there are undoubted challenges for such a small country in resisting this threat, there are certainly opportunities for Georgia and for Western nations eager to support. After all, the latter should understand that they have as much to learn in Georgia as to teach.

The threat of Russian aggression in Eastern Europe is once again lingering. As if by clockwork, Russia’s relations with its neighbors are under scrutiny once more, six years after its annexation of Crimea and 12 years after its invasion of Georgia.

As attacks by ISIS increase in both Iraq and Syria, the upcoming U.S. presidential election offers a turning point for how U.S. foreign policy will seek to address a potential ISIS resurgence. This paper lays out this growing problem and recommends policy, which will be constrained by the outcome of the November election.

In Frontier Europe Initiative’s new briefing book, entitled Election 2020: The Future of Black Sea-U.S. Relations, MEI scholars and external contributors identify key issues across the region, highlight U.S. interests at stake, and provide policy insights and recommendations for the path forward. The pieces in this book serve as a contribution to the broader discussion about the challenges and opportunities for U.S. policy in the region

Afghanistan remains at the center of U.S. and international counterterrorism concerns. As America prepares to pull out its military forces from the country, policymakers remain divided on how terrorist groups in Afghanistan might challenge the security of the U.S. and the threat they pose to allies and regional countries. Advocates of withdrawal argue that the terrorism threat from Afghanistan is overstated, while opponents say that it remains significant and is likely to grow after the drawdown of U.S. forces. This report evaluates the terrorism challenge in Afghanistan by focusing on the political trajectories of three key armed actors in the Afghan context: al-Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban, and the Islamic State.

This week’s briefing on recent news and upcoming events in the region featuring Charles Lister, Ruba Husari, Marvin G. Weinbaum, and W. Robert Pearson.

Protracted regional conflicts affect the security and stability of the Black Sea region in a number of ways, including through increased militarization, the growing influence of disinformation, and an absence of comprehensive domestic and regional peacebuilding policies.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict could spill over to Iran’s Azeri minority, setting off a battle the government can’t contain.

Thousands of former ISIS fighters and tens of thousands of civilians indoctrinated in the group’s extremist ideology currently sit in prisons and refugee camps across Iraq and Syria. Leaving the detainees there is dangerous, but transitioning them will require some type of accountability for the crimes committed. This paper explores options for international action to deal with the detention of ISIS members from Iraq and Syria and the foreign terrorist fighters who joined the group from around the globe.

It has now been more than two weeks since fighting flared up along the frontlines of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Far from being a small skirmish like the fighting was in July, the current fighting is taking place along the entire frontline. The Republic of Georgia is located right in the middle of this current storm. One only has to look at a map to see Georgia’s predicament.

Over the past few years, both Russia and Turkey have played key roles in the world’s hottest conflict zones. Usually on opposite sides and often on the verge of a direct confrontation, Moscow and Ankara have demonstrated a knack for brinkmanship and crisis management through diplomacy. While both sides have suffered casualties, they pulled back before any fight got too big. On Sept. 27 the latest in a series of conflicts emerged when fighting broke out again between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh. With Turkey and Russia on opposite sides once more, the flare-up in the South Caucasus will be a major test of whether their relationship will bend or break.