With the growth in points of friction between the great powers, organizations like the SCO will continue to play a role in the strategic adaptation of the smaller powers caught between them.
Temur Umarov
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Nuclear Policy"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy",
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Iran",
"Iraq",
"Afghanistan"
],
"topics": [
"Military",
"Foreign Policy",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
Iran continues to be a critical national security challenge for the United States. A different approach is required. In a new policy brief, Karim Sadjadpour explains that the relevant question is not whether to talk to Iran but how to talk to Iran, and prioritizes U.S. engagement with Iran on six critical issues.

WASHINGTON, Oct 16—Iran continues to be a critical national security challenge for the United States, despite decades of effort to change Tehran’s behavior by isolating the country politically and economically. A different approach is required. In a new policy brief, Karim Sadjadpour explains that the relevant question is not whether to talk to Iran but how to talk to Iran, and prioritizes U.S. engagement with Iran on six critical issues: Iraq, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation, the Arab–Israeli conflict, energy, and terrorism.
The next U.S. president should:
Sadjadpour concludes with a note of caution:
“Around the same time the next U.S. president is inaugurated, the Iranian revolution will mark its thirtieth anniversary. Given three decades of compounded mistrust and ill will, the results of any process of engagement will not be quick; such antagonism will not melt away after one, two, or even many meetings. The initial pace will likely be painfully slow, as each side ascertains whether the other truly has good intentions. Furthermore, given the potentially enormous implications that a changed relationship with Washington would have for the Islamic Republic’s future, there are a variety of reasons why even a sincere, sustained American attempt at dialogue may not initially bear fruit.”
###

Carnegie 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.
With the growth in points of friction between the great powers, organizations like the SCO will continue to play a role in the strategic adaptation of the smaller powers caught between them.
Temur Umarov
Amid celebrations of bilateral ties was a deeper focus on stability in the Middle East.
Amr Hamzawy
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has twice inspired praise for standing up to U.S. President Donald Trump: at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos and on Canada-U.S. trade negotiations. Is Carney showing a third way better than the EU has in dealing with the Trump administration?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
Middle Eastern states should welcome an accelerated U.S. disengagement from their region.
Michael Young
Xi, Putin, and other regional leaders are back-slapping in Bishkek, but the SCO has yet to answer the most serious questions about continental Asia's economic future.
Evan A. Feigenbaum