Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
The Russian military intervention in Syria has generated considerable confusion among foreign governments opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s continued rule over the country.
Contention about the pros and cons of the Oslo Accords is unlikely to end anytime soon.
Despite recent diplomatic efforts to end the Syrian conflict, the Assad regime continues to be buttressed by its Russian and Iranian allies.
U.S. and Turkish relations continue to be tested by both the fight against the self-proclaimed Islamic State and the Kurdish question.
A year after his appointment, Iraqi prime minister Haidar al-‘Abadi continues to face an uphill struggle to build a politically inclusive and functionally viable state.
Key external powers involved in the Syrian conflict seem to be engaged in little more than positioning and public relations. Although the prospect of ending Syria’s tragedy is tantalizing, it remains unlikely.
There is a broad consensus among Arab leaders and commentators that the Iran nuclear agreement will have far-reaching geostrategic effects on their countries.
The intensification of Turkish military action against the self-proclaimed Islamic State and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party does not translate into establishing a safe zone in Syria.
Any changes to the map of Syria’s conflict in the rest of 2015 will almost certainly occur in its “shatterbelt:” those areas caught between the regime, armed opposition, and self-proclaimed Islamic State.
Libya and Yemen will not reemerge as sovereign states without resolving fundamental struggles over the purpose and form of their security sectors.
