The battle that pitted the Lebanese Armed Forces against Islamist extremist groups led by the Islamic State (ISIS) in the border town of Arsal in early August 2014 has exposed a web of intertwined problems in Lebanon.
The world can be an awfully dangerous and unpredictable place.
A long-term U.S. strategy toward the Middle East must embrace not just momentarily stabilizing choices but those that will promote changes that make stability more durable.
Despite its attempts to remain untouched by regional turmoil, Lebanon is deeply entangled—and will continue to be as long as Hezbollah is outside of official control.
The Syrian army is plagued by defections, and yet it fights on. That is a testament to the way in which the military has adapted to the challenge of the country’s civil war.
The radical jihadi group known as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union. A little bit more than twenty years after it first appeared, this on-going transformation has made it less connected to Uzbekistan, and more to a global jihad.
Fears of a potential shift in Lebanon’s confessional balance are driving power brokers to enact harsher restrictions on incoming Syrian refugees.
The fundamental dilemma of Moscow’s policy lies in whether it is worth cooperating to achieve a comprehensive agreement with Iran, which would primarily be a success for the United States, under conditions of confrontation with the West over Ukraine.
There are no indications that Assad is ready to let anyone not under his control join the new government in his third term as president. Genuine power sharing in Syria will remain as distant as ever.
The Islamic State is trying to consolidate its presence in Syria and gain territory using new strategies during its latest push.












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