Research & Commentary Results

Syria’s national dialogue, held in Damascus at the end of February, was intended to chart the country’s future, one that would have been unthinkable just three months earlier. However, the process and outcomes of the dialogue were flawed, left critical questions unanswered, and raised new concerns.

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.

Ibrahim Dalalsha, founder and director of Horizon Center for Political Studies and Media Outreach, and Shira Efron, research director at the Israel Policy Forum, join host Brian Katulis to discuss policy developments in the devastating war between Israel and Hamas, and how Israelis and Palestinians can work together toward a peaceful resolution of conflict.

Some analysts try to explain Trump’s Middle East rhetoric as an effort to provoke a new type of conversation and to break the mold. But one unconventional source that helps explain Trump’s tactics is pro wrestling, in which the actions are understood to be illusory but still prompt a response from all sides.

This massive distraction of the Trump administration’s Gaza non-plan and the even more serious move of dismantling America’s ability to shape and influence events abroad together carry three risks for the Middle East.

Observing the unfolding of President Donald Trump’s second term from the Middle East is as confusing and disorienting as it must be from the United States. In Palestine, Egypt, and Jordan, urgent concern is focused on Trump’s surprise plan to take over the Gaza Strip, displace its population, and rebuild it as the “Riviera of the Middle East.” In Israel, the right wing is extremely pleased with Trump’s gift, but they don’t know what he has planned for the West Bank. In the Arab Gulf monarchies, leaders are generally happy to be dealing with Trump again but are alarmed by the recklessness of his Gaza plan and concerned about the potential impact his energy and tariff policies could have on their economies.

The Trump administration’s Middle East approach in its first three weeks back in office was filled with plenty of sound and fury. It’s still too soon to tell whether all of the noise signifies much of anything for the region, yet there are few promising signs of a smooth ride ahead.

President Trump’s Gaza ploy is really aimed at the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia most directly, to rebuild Gaza and cozy up to Israel.

Despite a few hiccups, the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas has achieved its initial milestones. Much will depend on the upcoming negotiations regarding the next phases of the agreement. Yet for now, the fundamental questions of who will govern Gaza, who will provide security, and who will deliver the funding to rebuild it have yet to be definitively resolved.

Either maintaining Russia’s military bases in Syria or finding an alternative outpost in the Mediterranean will prove extremely difficult for Moscow. And part of the problem with pursuing the latter option, particularly if in Libya, is that it would require a full-on transformation of Russia’s military presence model — from more traditional bases designed to establish deterrence by showing the flag in the region to building up a military and logistical operation inside a security “gray zone.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces a potentially disastrous showdown within the next month that could shake his hold on power, unless he manages to deter the strongly held positions of the foreign and domestic politicians and political forces on which he is dependent.

In his second term in office, President Donald Trump faces a Middle East undergoing multifaceted upheaval and an Islamic Republic of Iran currently in its weakest and most isolated position since the founding of the regime in 1979. Yet far from permanently subdued, Tehran continues to move closer to building a nuclear weapon, and it is trying to preserve its regional network of proxies and non-state allies. Trump now faces an important strategic choice on Iran policy. This report analyzes three overarching dynamics: the shifting strategic landscape across the Middle East in 2023-24; the impact of these shifts on Iran and its Axis of Resistance network; and Iran’s current position and standing at home and in the region. It concludes with a series of strategic-level recommendations for the new administration.

The election of President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam is a political breakthrough in Lebanon and a harbinger of what could happen in a country long dismissed as unsalvageable. Beirut’s new leadership reflects the aspiration of a majority of the Lebanese people to live in a functioning state free from the dual drivers of its failure: political violence and pervasive corruption. Those leaders must now deliver on their commitment to establish a state committed and accountable to its people and rise to meet the responsibility that comes with holding the promise of a nation’s future.

It is becoming apparent that negotiations between the new leadership in Damascus and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) face significant obstacles due to disagreements over military structure and administrative demands. These issues reflect the difficulty of reaching a mutual understanding between the two parties. As these challenges persist, there is growing talk of a potential military escalation in eastern Syria, amid residents’ fears and international mediation efforts to contain the crisis and achieve progress in the negotiations.

The cease-fire deal between Israel and Hamas announced on Jan. 15 took more than a year to reach and almost certainly will take much longer to fully realize than the four-plus months outlined in the framework. Like many things in life, this agreement was hard to build and will be easy to tear down. Indeed, the deal has already run into issues even before it is set to take effect on Jan. 19, with a dispute within the Israeli cabinet delaying a vote on it to Jan. 17.