• Testimony

Towards a New Stage in U.S. Kazakh Relations

• Martha Brill Olcott
• August 23, 2006
• Kazakhstan and the USA Conference

The title of my talk—“Towards a New Stage in U.S. Kazakh Relations in the area of Security Relations”—is designed to be illustrative. I believe that the long-established and deeply rooted cooperation in the area of security relations can serve as an important foundation for taking U.S.-Kazakh relations to a new stage.

• Op-Ed

State of Rejection

• John Judis
• August 23, 2006
• The New Republic Online

The administration's refusal to talk to Syria and Iran reflects a view of diplomacy that is at odds with the practice of most other countries and of other American administrations. If countries are directly at war, diplomatic relations are out of the question. But most countries conceive of diplomacy as a means of resolving conflicts with adversaries short of war.

• TV/Radio Broadcast

Iran and the Nuclear Deal

• George Perkovich
• August 23, 2006
• The Diane Rehm Show

• TV/Radio Broadcast

Amr Hamzawy on Al Jazeera

• Amr Hamzawy
• August 19, 2006

Carnegie's Amr Hamzawy appeared on Al Jazeera TV to talk about the current crisis in the Middle East. Hamzawy discussed prospects of a national unity government in Palestine, Iran's nuclear ambitions, French-American differences regarding the war in Lebanon, America's strategic interests in the Middle East, and the confrontation between Hizbullah and Israel.

• Proliferation Analysis

Update: Indian Questioning of US-India Nuclear Deal

• Anirudh Suri
• August 17, 2006

On July 26, the US House of Representatives passed the “United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006” by a clear majority. The Senate version of the Bill will be voted upon, most likely, in September. The House of Representatives adopted the Bill only after ensuring that even after being passed by the Senate and the enactment of the Act into law, the nuclear cooperation agreement would still need the approval of the Congress, thus maintaining its full oversight authority.

The House also demanded periodic reporting from the President on India’s compliance with key U.S. objectives in the region as well as on issues of non-proliferation. In two non-binding sections included in the Bill, the “Sense of the House” and “Statements of Policy,” the House outlined key U.S. interests including, but not limited to : (i) the achievement of a moratorium on the production of fissile material for production of nuclear weapons; (ii) securing India’s full support of and participation in U.S. efforts to deter and possibly isolate and sanction Iran for its attempts to acquire nuclear weapons; and (iii) a complete declaration of India’s civil nuclear facilities to the IAEA as well as a safeguards regime in perpetuity in conformity with IAEA’s practices, standards and principles,  rather than an India-specific safeguards regime.

These modifications have generated apprehension on the Indian side. Among the political parties, the CPI (M), a key leftist ally of the ruling Congress government with a traditionally anti-US stance, has expressed a heightened sense of concern about the deal’s impact on India’s ability to continue to pursue an independent foreign policy. The Hindu nationalist party, the BJP, has also voiced similar concerns. On August 10th, the BJP announced that former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee would lead a delegation of Parliamentarians to President Abdul Kalam to seek his intervention to prevent the passage of a deal that they believed would compromise India’s ability to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent. Sensing an opportunity to rally all the parties in opposition to the deal against the ruling Congress, the BJP also invited the Left, including CPI (M) to support this move. (Read More)

• Op-Ed

India is Divided Over Its Ties to the US: Push and Pull

• Josh Kurlantzick
• August 03, 2006
• The New Republic Online
• • 中文

The nuclear deal was recently approved by the U.S. Congress but average educated Indians have mixed feelings about the U.S. The combination of Indian intellectuals over 40 who came of age during the Cold War, younger intellectuals who associate the U.S. with materialism and a sizable Muslim minority opposed to U.S. foreign policy means that India is yet to overcome the past.

• Op-Ed

Apocalypse Now: Bush's Failed Israel Strategy

• John Judis
• August 02, 2006
• The New Republic Online
• • 中文

President Bush's view of Israel as a strategic ally and vision of a "new Middle East" has seen the escalation of the second intifada, the eclipse of Arafat's Fatah by the more radical Hamas, and a two-front war in Gaza and southern Lebanon. Bush's "new Middle East," has begun to look even less hospitable than the old.

• Op-Ed

Israeli Attacks on Lebanese Civilians Hurt U.S. Standing in Region

• Julia Choucair-Vizoso
• August 01, 2006
• Council on Foreign Relations Interview

Even though many Lebanese people and several Arab governments criticized Hezbollah for instigating the crisis with Israel, the Israeli air attacks -- including the killing of many civilians -- have now quieted the criticism, and in fact have worsened the already poor standing of the United States in the Arab world.

• Paper

Islam, Militarism, and the 2007–2008 Elections in Pakistan

• Frederic Grare
• July 24, 2006
• Carnegie Endowment

• Op-Ed

Middle East: U.S. Disengagement Contributed To Crisis

• Nathan J. Brown
• July 20, 2006
• Radio Free Europe

Aggressive acts like the ones Hizballah and Hamas have perpetrated against Israel in recent weeks are rare against a country that has the strongest military in the region and the world's only military superpower as its chief sponsor. The raids are attributable less to U.S. engagement in Iraq, for instance, than to Washington's disengagement in recent years from the Middle East peace process.