Washington and its allies should strategically continue patient diplomacy unless Iran resumes provocative nuclear activities.
The Iranian nuclear program can at best provide only two percent of Iran’s energy needs. It is an economic catastrophe when compared to the lost foreign investment, oil revenue, and sanctions.
A big challenge for the Iranian nuclear negotiations is finding a technical resolution to what is really a political conflict.
The intent of U.S. policy should be to deter Iran’s nuclear advancement, not provoke it.
Beijing is committed to advocating for reduced tensions and peaceful solutions to regional challenges in the Middle East, like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Iran nuclear talks.
Stakeholders in Iranian nuclear negotiations must manage their strategic considerations to preserve Tehran’s right to produce nuclear energy while also reducing the program’s military potential.
On November 11, Russia and Iran signed a package of documents paving the way for Moscow to construct up to eight nuclear power units. With this agreement, Russia and Iran have established a solid economic foundation for political dialogue.
Congressional sanctions should be conceived in order to deter Iran’s nuclear ambitions, not provoke them.
By arguing against Iraqis being drawn into cross-border sectarian struggles, Muqtada al-Sadr has positioned himself as an important voice of reason within the Shia community that dominates Iraq.
The EU’s approach to Iran has emerged as one of the few successes of European foreign policy. Now, the EU needs to develop a comprehensive strategy beyond the nuclear issue.
















Stay connected to the Global Think Tank with Carnegie's smartphone app for Android and iOS devices