In The Media
Lina Khatib
{
"authors": [
"Lina Khatib"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Gulf",
"Levant",
"Syria",
"Iraq",
"Middle East"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Degrading ISIS
If Obama’s strategy to defeat the Islamic State is to work, the Saudis and Iranians must cooperate.
By Lina Khatib
Published on Sep 11, 2014
Source: ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live
Speaking on ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live, Carnegie’s Lina Khatib discussed U.S. President Obama’s strategy speech to defeat the Islamic State. Khatib said that “the speech marked a significant turn in U.S. foreign policy towards the Syrian conflict, because this is the first time that we’ve seen declaration of intention on part of the United States to engage in this conflict militarily.” Khatib added that the speech was also very positive, because Obama stated that Arab countries “are also responsible for taking part in securing the region against Islamism with international cooperation.”
Khatib pointed out that Obama spoke about a broad coalition, leaving the door open for Iranian involvement further down the line. She clarified that back channel talks had been already taking place between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which are driven by the shared concern over the Islamic State—an enemy to both countries. However, Khatib continued, “we don’t know what the nature of compromise or cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Iran might be. However...I think we can expect to see Iranian involvement—whether direct or indirect—sometime in the future.”
Khatib concluded that Obama’s campaign against the Islamic State would be a long-term campaign. “Had the United States intervened diplomatically very early on in the Syrian uprising ,” said Khatib, “we would not be where we are right now. However, speaking pragmatically, the speech and strategy that’s presented is certainly better than the alternative, which is doing nothing and allowing Syria to fall back into the hands of the Islamic State and the Assad regime and expand further in Iraq.”
This interview was originally broadcasted on ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live.
About the Author
Lina Khatib
Former Director, Middle East Center
Khatib was director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Previously, she was the co-founding head of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.
- Syria's Last Best Hope: The Southern Front
- The Islamic State’s Strategy: Lasting and ExpandingPaper
Lina Khatib
Recent Work
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie India
- Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026Article
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
- India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible PathwaysArticle
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
- Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTACommentary
The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead
Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki
- India’s Oil Security Strategy: Structural Vulnerabilities and Strategic ChoicesArticle
This piece argues that the present Indian strategy, based on opportunistic diversification and utilization of limited strategic reserves, remains inadequate when confronting supply disruptions. It evaluates India’s options in the short, medium, and long terms.
Vrinda Sahai
- India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 EraResearch
Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.
- +6
Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …
