Iran's threat to shut down the Strait of Hormuz and strangle the U.S. oil supply could provide a much-needed impetus for the United States to reconsider its energy policies.
With anxieties over the nuclear activities of North Korea and Iran looming large, heads of state from 53 countries convened in Seoul this week to reaffirm and intensify their commitment to prevent nuclear materials from getting into the hands of terrorists.
Although policymakers worry that an Iranian atomic weapon would force the country's neighbors to explore the nuclear option, that is not the case for Turkey.
Concern over Iran’s nuclear program often ignores the fact that Iran is still a significant amount of time from actually acquiring a nuclear weapon. This leaves policymakers with ample time to engage in diplomacy and develop coercive sanctions.
Dialing down the rhetoric between Israel, Iran, and the United States is an important component in allowing coercive sanctions and diplomacy to run its course.
In the aftermath of parliamentary elections in Iran, it is increasingly clear that the Iran is now a one party state.
Israel and the United States have focused on the security threat from Iran's nuclear program, but this threat may be overstated. Indeed, both Israel and the United States may have bigger security concerns closer to home.
This year there will be presidential elections or changes of heads of government in countries that together account for over half of the world economy, a process which could have an adverse effect on the quality of the decisions made by governments.
With the Iranian nuclear crisis nearing a watershed, the question of the Obama administration's "red lines" on Iran's nuclear program is the subject of considerable speculation and debate.
As the Islamic Republic of Iran prepares for parliamentary elections in March, it remains unclear who controls the country - the clerics or the military.
















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