Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Iran Content Type Commentary and Analysis

11. Saudi Arabia’s Balancing Game: The Palestinian Cause and Regional Leadership

Author:
Giulia Daga and Luigi Simonelli
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In the hours following Hamas’s violent attack on Israel of 7 October, the Saudi authorities called for “an immediate de-escalation”, while noting that they had previously warned against the outcomes of “the continued occupation and depriving Palestinians of their legitimate rights and the repeated systematic provocations against their sanctities”.[1] In a more recent declaration, the Saudi Foreign Minister has reiterated the country’s “categorical rejection of calls for the forced displacement of the Palestinian people from Gaza, and its condemnation of the continued targeting of defenceless civilians there”.[2] Reportedly, the heavy retaliation measures adopted by Israel, whose bombing campaign against Gaza has been one of the most intense of this century,[3] also including the apparent use of white phosphorus,[4] resulted in the halt of the normalisation process between Saudi Arabia and Israel, which should have followed suit on the 2020 Abraham Accords. Only a few weeks before, on 20 September, the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had announced on US television that “every day, we get closer” to an agreement with Israel.[5] A few days later, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had reiterated the same optimism in front of the United Nations General Assembly general debate, insisting that the Palestinians should not be given “a veto over new peace treaties with Arab states”.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Leadership, Regional Power, and October 7
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Saudi Arabia

12. REVISITING THE EMBOLDENING POWER OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Author:
Kyungwon Suh
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
Do nuclear weapons make their possessors more aggressive? A series of high-profile aggressive actions by some nuclear-armed states appear to substantiate the argument that nuclear weapons enable aggressive behavior. Since its all-out invasion of Ukraine in February, Russia has continued to conduct brutal, coercive operations, including missile strikes against Ukrainian civilian infrastructure and population centers. North Korea has continued to test launch a wide array of missiles, one of which recently landed close to South Korea’s territorial waters. Policymakers also echo the view that nuclear weapons are more than simply defensive weapons. The 2022 Nuclear Posture Review argues that Russian leaders have exploited their nuclear arsenal as a “shield” behind which they launched military aggression against Ukraine. When he was CIA Director, Formal Secretary of State Mike Pompeo argued that Pyongyang could use nuclear weapons “beyond self-preservation.”
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Weapons, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Russia-Ukraine War, and Mike Pompeo
Political Geography:
Russia, Iran, Ukraine, Middle East, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America

13. Biden’s Foreign Policy Casts a Long Shadow

Author:
Riccardo Alcaro
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
Upon taking office as US president, Joseph R. Biden vowed he would bring the United States back to the centre of the international stage after the erratic course followed by Donald Trump. One year later, it can hardly be said that he has been successful.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Transatlantic Relations, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iran, North America, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

14. Iranian Jews in Israel, Protests, and the Palestinians

Author:
Lior Sternfeld
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Abstract:
Roughly 250,000 Israelis are of Iranian descent, and many feel a strong connection to their Iranian identity. Iranian Jews in Israel organized rallies in solidarity with Iranian women following the death of Masha Amini at the hands of the Islamic Republic’s morality police. Israeli support for the Iranian protest movement stands in tension with the Israeli government’s approach to the Palestinians.
Topic:
Social Movement, Solidarity, Protests, and Jewish community
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

15. Iran and the United Nations: Breaking New Ground at the Human Rights Council, Is the Commission for the Status of Women Next?

Author:
Neda Bolourchi
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Abstract:
Roughly 3,100,000 Euro-Americans are of Iranian descent, and many feel a strong connection to their Iranian identity and heritage. Those of Iranian descent have succeeded in all sectors of professional life, from medicine to law to technology to banking to politics and more. Euro-American support for the Iranian protest movement has moved from online activism to making history at the United Nations, first on the Human Rights Council and possibly next on the Commission for the Status of Women.
Topic:
Human Rights, United Nations, Social Movement, Women, and Protests
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

16. “Maximum Pressure” Harms Diplomacy and Increases Risks of War with Iran

Author:
Daniel Depetris
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
With an economy less than a third the size of the U.S. defense budget and a military ill-suited for offensive operations, Iran is at best a minor threat to the U.S., and one in a region of limited strategic importance. The U.S. need not obsess over Iran policy. While Iran does not threaten vital U.S. interests, U.S. policy does seek to moderate Iran’s behavior and restrict its nuclear weapons development. That is why the U.S. negotiated the JCPOA, an agreement with Iran, Europe’s major powers, Russia, and China to constrain Iran’s nuclear activities. The Trump administration abrogated the JCPOA and imposed a policy of “maximum pressure” designed to compel Iran to renegotiate on nuclear issues and moderate its foreign policy. Rather than capitulate to U.S. demands, Iran expanded its nuclear program and increased its aggression in the Middle East. U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA and imposition of a maximum pressure strategy harmed diplomatic efforts with Iran and increased the prospects of direct conflict. The Biden administration has so far continued the policy it inherited from the Trump administration. With nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran predictably stalled, U.S. officials should abandon maximum pressure. Ongoing diplomacy is the best path to revive the JCPOA, and more importantly, lower the risks of war. Even if the JCPOA dissolves completely, U.S.-Iran diplomacy, including on nuclear issues, should continue. War with Iran is not worth the costs.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Conflict, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

17. ‘Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong:’ The Imposition of Islamic Morality in Iran, Yemen, Egypt, and Iraq

Author:
Luca Nevola
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
Abstract:
Religious repression is often targeted at individuals and groups that express religious behaviors or religious affiliation (Fox, 2016; Sarkissian, 26 May 2015). However, repressive acts can also be directed at imposing a coercer’s religious values regardless of the victim’s religious affiliation (or lack thereof). ACLED-Religion captures this type of religious repression under the ‘imposition’ religious context (ACLED-Religion Codebook, 2021). Critically, religious imposition does not delineate specific repression victims. Indeed, a perpetrator can impose their values on believers of a different religion, on “religiously unaffiliated” or non-practicing individuals (Pew Research Center, 18 December 2012), and on individuals practicing the perpetrator’s religion differently.
Topic:
Islam, Religion, Violence, and Repression
Political Geography:
Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Yemen, and Egypt

18. Disappointed in Rouhani, Iranians Seek a Different Sort of Leader in June Elections

Author:
Brendan Helm, Dina Smeltz, and Amir Farmanesh
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
New indirect talks between the United States and Iran on a return to the Iran deal could help the outlook for a moderate candidate in the next election. Iranian presidential elections are set for June 18. The current president, Hassan Rouhani, who earned initial praise in Iran after successful negotiations for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, is ineligible for reelection and has steadily lost public support after the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal in 2018. A joint survey of the Iranian public conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and IranPoll provides insights into how Iranians view this pivotal moment for Iran. Iranians view Rouhani’s policies quite negatively, especially his economic policies, and for their next leader they want someone who is critical of Rouhani. However, while Iranians did not feel the economic improvements from the JCPOA they expected, new indirect talks between the United States and Iran on a return to the agreement could help the outlook for a moderate candidate.
Topic:
Politics, Elections, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

19. President Biden: Try for a Double Play on Iran and Afghanistan

Author:
Jon Greenwald
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:
Southwest Asia is increasingly dangerous. Negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program appear stuck near a breakpoint. With the Kabul government’s precipitous collapse, President Biden’s courageous decision to remove U.S. troops from Afghanistan has gone badly. Each situation threatens grave consequences for the administration. Together they suggest more deadly chaos looms from the Middle East to China’s borders. Iran is an important common factor, central to the first case, important in the second due to geography and potential leverage. The concurrence of threat – but also perhaps opportunity – justifies a new strategy for dealing with it that cuts across both situations. Joe Biden said before taking office that it was a priority to restore the nuclear deal that was working well until Donald Trump took the U.S. out. He pledged to conclude the endless war in Afghanistan. Today neither objective appears promising. Iran has more enriched and closer to weapons level uranium than when the original deal was signed. U.S. officials acknowledge that negotiating time is limited and, by implication, that military action may be required to keep the president’s pledge never to allow an Iranian bomb. As the Taliban takes over Afghanistan, Washington is focused as it should be on safely extracting U.S. citizens and the many thousands of Afghans whose lives are at risk for having helped the Americans over 20 years. Soon, however, there will be new proposals, including preparations for off-shore responses to what many anticipate will be a revival of the kind of civil war that ravaged Afghanistan in the 1990s. Any reasonable proposal should include at the least a significant diplomatic component in which Afghanistan’s neighbors, Iran prominent among them, apply their weight to persuade the Taliban to rule more moderately than it did its first time in power and in particular to keep out international terrorists. Most acknowledge that a key weakness of that approach is U.S. inability to work with Tehran.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

20. Four Scenarios for the Iran Nuclear Deal

Author:
Riccardo Alcaro
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
After a hiatus of over five months, negotiations to restore the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, have finally resumed in Vienna. Struck in July 2015 by Iran and a group of six powers – France, Germany and the UK plus China, Russia and the US, as well as the EU (E3/EU+3)–, the JCPOA placed limits on Iranian nuclear activities, while also introducing a highly intrusive inspection regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The deal is in a comatose state due to former US President Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally pull out of the agreement and re-adopt all sanctions on Iran in May 2018. In response, since May 2019 Iran has progressively reduced its compliance with its non-proliferation obligations under the deal.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Treaties and Agreements, Disarmament, Nonproliferation, Transatlantic Relations, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
Europe, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America