For Iran, the Syrian conflict has been a zero sum game, making it difficult to negotiate.
The surprising endurance of the Iran-Syria alliance is made more striking by the fact that it is based on neither shared national interests nor religious values, but is rather a tactical-cum-strategic partnership between two authoritarian regimes.
While the media has focused on recent allegations of a secret uranium deal between Zimbabwe and Iran, the real story of Iran’s efforts to obtain secondary uranium sources is a much more complicated one.
As the U.S. troop withdrawal approaches, Washington should consider how improving U.S.-Iranian relations can further its long-term goals in Afghanistan and the region.
Although Ahmadinejad’s mismanagement and abrasive style lost him supporters and political allies, his confidence and boastfulness never faltered.
The United States should be able to address Iran’s focus on getting an understanding of the “endgame” in return for substantial Iranian agreement on the compelling nuclear issues.
Were U.S.-Iran diplomacy to significantly improve after Rouhani’s election, the revelation that Iran was preparing a new underground nuclear site would be poison.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly last September demonstrated the extent to which public awareness of the foreign policy debate has changed thanks to social media.
Iran threatens to disrupt an otherwise warming relationship between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, is the most important player in decisions on Iran’s nuclear program. So in the aftermath of Hassan Rouhani’s election, the global community had better pay close attention to what Khamenei says.
















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