Content Type: Working Paper / Political Geography: Iran

101. Israel Needs to Strike Hezbollah to Ensure its Freedom of Action

Author:: Omer Dostri
Publication Date:: 08-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: A limited Israeli military operation in Lebanon would strengthen Israeli deterrence against Hezbollah. It also would deepen Iran’s sense of defeat and demonstrate Israel’s determination to check Iran’s malign activity.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Deterrence
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

102. Qods Day Advances Iran’s Regional Aspirations

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 06-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: “Qods Day” reflects Tehran’s determination to annihilate Israel, a pillar of Iranian foreign policy. It also is an important part of “exporting” the Islamic Revolution.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Ideology
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

103. Reject Iran’s Request for an IMF Loan

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 06-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Under the pretext of separation between regime and people, Iran seeks $5 billion in IMF emergency funding to fight COVID-19. This would significantly undermine the pressure on Iran being applied by US sanctions, and therefore the loan should be denied.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Sanctions, Pandemic, IMF, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

104. Rising Tensions and Security Chaos in Syria’s Deraa Province

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 06-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: A four-way contest under way between the Assad regime, Russian interests, Iranian interests, and unreconciled former rebels.
Topic:: Security, Conflict, Regionalism, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

105. Cyber-Warfare between Iran and Israel

Author:: Omer Dostri
Publication Date:: 06-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The recent reciprocal cyber-attacks attributed to Israel and Iran were meant to set red lines on the non-kinetic dimension of war.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Cybersecurity, Conflict, and Digitalization
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

106. Is Iran Gaining a Foothold in the West Bank?

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 05-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: A moribund terrorist group, the PFLP, is experiencing a revival and launching terror attacks, with help from Iran.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Territorial Disputes, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

107. Coronavirus has not changed the Middle East

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 05-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Conflicts persist, and the revisionist powers continue their disruptive behavior. This includes Iranian subversion and acceleration of its nuclear project, as well as Turkey’s expansionism in Syria.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

108. Israel’s strategy in Syria is less coherent than it seems

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 05-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: There is a discrepancy between the stated goal – the expulsion of Iran from Syria – and the means being employed by Israel to achieve it.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Strategic Stability, Strategic Interests, and Intervention
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

109. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Goes to Space

Author:: Uzi Rubin
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Now that IRGC leadership in Iran’s space effort is out in the open, it can be expected that its homemade, long-range rockets with a global reach will be revealed soon, as well.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Space, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

110. Iran keeps up its malign behavior, pandemic notwithstanding

Author:: Yaakov Amidror
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: In the meantime, it doesn’t seem as though Iran – the driving force behind most of the friction in the Middle East – is changing its plans or abandoning its dreams, whether in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq or even Yemen.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

111. Coronavirus and the Campaign against Iran

Author:: Udi Levi
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: There may be a change in Iranian policy towards the US due to Iran’s economic and coronavirus difficulties.
Topic:: Economics, Sanctions, Fragile States, Conflict, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

112. Mullahs & COVID-19: Iran’s failing response reflects regime’s priorities

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 03-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The Iranian regime’s response to the coronavirus crisis has been erratic and flailing.
Topic:: Governance, Leadership, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

113. What we know about Iran five years after Netanyahu’s speech to Congress

Author:: Yaakov Amidror
Publication Date:: 03-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: We have five years of experience to compare to the competing assessments of 2015. Now we know that Netanyahu’s gloomy forecast has proven to be the more prescient.
Topic:: Security, Military Strategy, Governance, Leadership, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

114. How Iran funds Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 03-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: PIJ is an important part of the Iranian strategy for fighting Israel. The regime in Tehran makes use of charities and other civilian organizations, such as money changers, to transfer funds to its allies in Gaza.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Conflict, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

115. After Soleimani: Iran Resumes Proxy Warfare Against the US

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 02-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Iran is reverting to attacks on the US through non-Iranian organizations under its control.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Proxy War, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

116. Iran, Hezbollah stir chaos in Syria’s southwest

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 02-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Behind Enemy Lines: Iran, Hezbollah and ongoing, armed resistance to Syria’s regime merge to create constant chaos.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Syria

117. Could Congress’ latest Syria sanctions bill backfire?

Author:: Aiman Mansour
Publication Date:: 01-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The congressional bill will exacerbate the economic situation in Syria and ultimately increase Syria’s dependency on Iran.
Topic:: Economics, Military Strategy, Sanctions, Legislation, and Intervention
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America

118. More pressure on Iran still needed

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 01-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Trump has made it clear that attacks on American personnel are going to elicit a military reaction.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Deterrence
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

119. Iran lacks good options

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 01-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: What appears to have caused this escalation was the departure by the Iranians from a tacit ground rule hitherto maintained.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Strategic Stability, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

120. The Battle for the Tribes in Northeast Syria

Author:: Nicholas Heras
Publication Date:: 11-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: Northeast Syria (NES) is fragmented under the control of different powers that are all seeking to gain the support of the local Arab tribes. Those seeking to upset the status quo include the Assad regime and its allies (Russia and Iran), Turkey and its Syrian rebel proxies, and ISIS —all seeking disruption with different motivations, yet working side by side. Those seeking to maintain the status quo include the U.S.-led Coalition, the Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria (AANES), and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Often, earning the support and alliance of the tribes is a transactional process whereby the tribes seek direct financial support and community investment, employment opportunities, military support, and autonomy to run their own affairs. Currently, most local tribal groups are calculating that a tenuous U.S.-protected order in northeast Syria provides better security and provisions than the alternatives from the Assad regime and its allies, or by Turkey and its Syrian rebel proxies. However, ISIS remains a threat to all the powers involved in northeast Syria, and it is the major spoiler seeking to create the conditions for a return to the old order which was established under ISIS’s territorial Caliphate from 2014-2019.
Topic:: Security, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America

121. Syria in the US and Israeli debate on Iran

Author:: Shira Efron
Publication Date:: 11-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: With presidential elections in the United States underway in November 2020[1], the only possible scenarios for Washington in the Middle East are either continuation and solidification, or a change in its Iran policy, each with different potential impacts on the geopolitical conflict between the United States, Israel, and allied Arab countries on one side and Iran and its regional Axis-of-Resistance on the other. Analysing current convergences and divergences between the United States and Israel on Syria and Iran is important to anticipate potential changes in both countries’ positions following the US election, as such changes may impact the effectiveness and even the prospect of the continuation of the United States’ so-called ‘Maximum Pressure’ campaign. The policies of the two countries on Syria and Iran became varyingly intertwined as Iran entrenched itself deeply in Syria. Nonetheless, it is important to note that Israel and the United States differ in their approaches to tackling Syria. This contribution attempts to assess the US campaign against Iran, the cost it is likely to have inflicted upon it in Syria, and the outlook of an agreement with Iran. Although we are considering US policy on Iran, the analysis here also includes the Israeli perspective. Private conversations with Israeli current and former officials have provided important insights into how Israeli officials see US policy in Syria and vis-à-vis Iran, and can add a unique contribution to the dialogue. In this analysis, we sought to address several issues. First, whether there are any incentives for Iran to concede to US demands or reach a meaningful bargain, and whether under a Biden or Trump administration a new Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) could be renegotiated to include Iranian expansion in the region. We also examined the form and incentives structure that could entice Iran to offer a constructive contribution to the stability of Syria and the region. In addition, we assessed to what extent the Maximum Pressure campaign affects Iran, and whether targeting Syria with sanctions would incentivise both the Syrian government and the Syrian locals (who are working with Iran as fighters) to break with Iran. Finally, assuming that Iran is in Syria to protect its own interests, we question whether more threats to Tehran would lead to reduced presence in Syria.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Governance, Elections, and Leadership
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America

122. Iran’s Preferred Outcome in Syria: An Open-End or a Formal Agreement?

Author:: Hassan Ahmadian
Publication Date:: 12-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: Iran’s security concerns drove its involvement in the Syrian crisis back in 2011. With an evolving strategy over the past nine years, Tehran has upgraded its Syria policy in accordance with the ongoing developments on the ground, moving from military training based on the Iranian Basij model, to regionalising this model (as was the case in Iraq with the Popular Mobilization Forces) and encouraging Russian military involvement. In what may be seen as the final stage, Iran is backing its Syrian ally as well as allied militias to balance against other main stakeholders. Iran is attempting to solidify military gains by continuing to back a political process that is properly representative of warring parties and ensures a smooth transition of power, and one whose outcomes will not undermine Iranian geopolitical interests in the country.
Topic:: Security, Development, Military Strategy, Regionalism, and Intervention
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

123. Norm and Dissidence: Egyptian Shiʿa between Security Approaches and Geopolitical Stakes

Author:: Stéphane Valter
Publication Date:: 01-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for International and Regional Studies (CIRS), Georgetown University in Qatar
Abstract:: This paper presents a study of Egyptian Shiʿism by providing historical context as well as a focus on actual or current issues. The study includes a historical overview of local Shiʿism (Fatimid period, late nineteenth century, 1940s–1960s, and contemporary period); Shiʿi institutions and personalities; the situation following Egypt’s 2011 revolution; the hectic one-year government of the Muslim Brotherhood (2012–2013); President al-Sisi’s authoritarian takeover; and, finally, an exploration of the current geopolitical stakes, focusing mainly on the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran over religious hegemony.
Topic:: Security, Geopolitics, and Shia
Political Geography:: Africa, Iran, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt

124. Israel-UAE Cooperation in 2019: Warming Relations, Also in Civilian Affairs

Author:: Moran Zaga
Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:: The relations between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel are primarily characterized by mutual interest and cautious rapprochement steps. The rapprochement can be attributed to the pragmatic character of the two states and their shared interests, including, inter alia, opposition to the Iranian nuclear program, opposing religious extremism, regional trade, modernization processes, handling similar environmental issues, and participation in global events and projects. The cautious approach and the limitations in these relations derive mainly from the UAE’s avoidance of official normalization with Israel due to the latter’s conduct regarding the Palestinian issue.
Topic:: International Relations, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Conflict, and Rapprochement
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, and United Arab Emirates

125. Israel’s Foreign Policy towards the September 2019 Elections

Author:: Yuval Steinitz, Ofer Shelah, Merav Michaeli, Yisrael Beiteinu, Nitzan Horowitz, and Ofer Cassif
Publication Date:: 09-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:: On 9 September 2019, the Mitvim Institute convened a pre-elections event on Israel’s foreign policy. The event focused on paths to advance peace with the Palestinians; to deepen Israel’s regional belonging in the Middle East, Europe and the Mediterranean; and to empower Israel’s diplomacy Foreign Service. Senior politicians from six political parties spoke at the event: Minister Yuval Steinitz (Likud), Member of Knesset (MK) Ofer Shelah (Blue and White), MK Merav Michaeli (Labor-Gesher), MK Eli Avidar (Yisrael Beiteinu), Nitzan Horowitz (Chair of the Democratic Union) and MK Ofer Cassif (Joint List). Each of them was interviewed by Arad Nir, foreign news editor of Channel 12 News. Dr. Nimrod Goren and Merav Kahana-Dagan of Mitvim delivered opening remarks in which they presented recent trends in Israel’s foreign policy and findings of a special pre-elections Mitvim poll. This document sums up the key points made at the event.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Government, Politics, and Elections
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

126. In Dire Straits? Implications of US-Iran Tensions for the Global Oil Market

Author:: Ilan Goldenberg, Jessica Schwed, and Kaleigh Thomas
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:: In recent months, Iran has responded to rising tensions with the United States—particularly the US launch of the “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran—by attacking oil tankers and infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region around the Strait of Hormuz (the Strait). These actions have been designed to signal to the United States, the Gulf states, and the international community that the American strategy of strangling Iran economically will not be cost-free, and to Saudi Arabia in particular that it is highly vulnerable to Iranian retaliation. As the Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, the implications of Iran’s efforts merit close scrutiny and analysis. This study was designed to examine three scenarios for military conflict between Iran and the United States and assess the potential impacts on global oil prices—as one specific representation of the immediate economic impact of conflict—as well as broader strategic implications. The three scenarios are: Increasing US-Iran tensions that ultimately lead to a new “Tanker War” scenario similar to the conflict of the 1980s, in which Iran attacks potentially hundreds of ships in the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman over a prolonged period while also launching missiles at Gulf oil infrastructure. An escalation of tensions between Iran and the United States in which Iran significantly increases the scope and severity of missile attacks directed at major oil and energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. A major conflict between Iran and the United States that includes damage to Gulf oil infrastructure and a temporary closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Its main conclusions are: The risk of a major military confrontation between the United States and Iran has increased in recent months but still remains relatively low, as neither the United States nor Iran wants war. That said, the September 14, 2019, attack on the Abqaiq and Khurais facilities was a strategic game changer and shows that the biggest risk is a prolonged, low-intensity military conflict. The fact that Iran was willing to conduct such an attack was a surprise to most analysts and to the US government and its Gulf partners. The level of accuracy it showed in the strike demonstrated a technical proficiency the US government and outside analysts did not believe Iran had. In the more moderate and likely conflict scenarios, increasing tensions between the United States and Iran are unlikely to dramatically affect global oil prices. The most profound costs in the more likely scenarios are not energy-related but security-related. Even in the less escalatory scenarios, the United States would be forced into long-term deployments of a large number of air and naval assets that would need to remain in the Middle East for years at a cost of billions of dollars. Such deployments would take away resources that would otherwise be dedicated to managing great power competition with China and Russia. In the more extreme conflict scenarios, major loss of life and an even bigger and longer-term American military deployment would be expected. In the lower likelihood scenario of a major military confrontation between the United States and Iran, global oil prices would be dramatically affected, though price impacts would not be prolonged. All assumptions about the potential impacts on oil prices are based on the supposition that the United States protects global shipping lanes, but that theory deserves further scrutiny. For more than a generation, the United States has viewed securing global shipping lanes that are critical for commerce and energy as a core vital interest. But given the isolationist tendencies in the United States and President Donald Trump’s attitude that America should stop underwriting the defense of its allies, it is conceivable he may choose not to respond in the types of scenarios described in this paper or demand that countries most dependent on oil trade from the Gulf—most notably China—step up instead. Another wild card for oil prices in a major crisis scenario would be President Trump’s unpredictable policies regarding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Typically, an administration would be expected to coordinate an international response with the International Energy Agency (IEA) to release the SPR of a number of countries, but this cannot be assumed in the current administration. Though these conclusions are to some extent comforting, the authors acknowledge that a key issue with any analysis of this situation is the unpredictability of the United States. In the present moment, neither US adversaries nor partners know quite what to expect—and, for that matter, neither does the US government or its observers.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Oil, and Global Political Economy
Political Geography:: United States, China, Iran, Middle East, and Asia

127. Russian and Iranian Economic Interests In Syria (Pre-2010 and intra-war period)

Author:: Hamidreza Azizi and Leonid Issaev
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: Discussion paper for the workshop on: “The Politics and Modalities of Reconstruction in Syria”, Geneva, Switzerland, 7-8 February 2019. There has historically been low levels of trade and investment from both Russia and Iran with Syria, with trade in military items being a notable exception. While the trade relationship between Syria and its two main allies predates the conflict, levels of trade had been remarkably low before the crisis, in contrast to mainstream perceptions. Yet, these figures cannot be confirmed due to unavailability of a comprehensive record of the Syrian bilateral relationship with Iran and Russia. Internationally imposed sanctions have discouraged Russian and Iranian companies from doing business with Syria. Lacking any other resources, the only way that Syrian could repay debts to its allies would be to grant exclusive access to energy and natural resources. This however would reduce the public revenue needed to rebuild state institutions, and also encourage foreign rivalry over economic opportunities. As Syria lacks any coordination mechanism for post-war economic reconstruction, Russia and Iran have set their eyes on the energy sector, where Russia has the upper hand. Yet, cooperation is also possible in other sectors, such as Syria’s rail sector. In order to understand the Russian and Iranian economic relationship with Syria, two factors should be considered. First is the informal relationship between Syria and its two allies, which has taken the form of unofficial agreements and trade. These would be important when sanctions are lifted. The second factor is military exports to Syria, expected to be large, given the scale of war and Syrian reliance on Russia and Iran. Due to lack of official data, this paper will not consider both issues.
Topic:: Economics, Sanctions, Conflict, Syrian War, Investment, and Trade
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

128. American Sanctions and European Sovereignty

Author:: Jean De Ruyt
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:: The decision by the United States to withdraw from the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” and re-impose sanctions on Iran broke an international understanding, sanctioned by a UN Security Council Resolution. However, European and other non-US companies dealing with Iran must abide by US law in order to avoid its extra- territorial effects on their US operations. Efforts are being made to help the EU keep its “sovereignty” on sanction issues when there is disagreement with the US, but until now these have not accomplished much. Therefore a new Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX) was launched at the end of January to ensure the continuation of some trade with Iran. But the only convincing way to allow the EU to increase its autonomy is to boost the role of the Euro in international transactions. Certainly, in today’s unpredictable world, we need more than ever to address the issue of the extraterritorial application of American sanctions – today it is Iran, what if tomorrow it is China?
Topic:: Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Sovereignty, Military Strategy, and Sanctions
Political Geography:: United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and North America

129. Reviving the Security Function: EU's Path to Save the JCPOA

Author:: Abdolrasool Divsallar and Marc Otte
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:: Europe's efforts to keep the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) for Iran alive hardly seem effective. On 28 June 2019, during a meeting of the Joint Commission of JCPOA, it was announced that the Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX) has been made operational. 1 Though it injected new hope into saving the deal, it is unlikely that in the long term INSTEX’ limited scope will meet Tehran's demands. The Middle East is going through tough times since the US unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA and started to exert 'maximum pressure' on Iran, prompting unparalled tensions between the two nations. Can the EU do more?
Topic:: Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, and Middle East

130. The Syrian State: A Two-Headed Monster is Emerging

Author:: Bassma Kodmani
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:: The Collapse of the Syrian state is largely a reality. Both Russia and Iran, Assad’s allies, know he is not the guarantor of the continuity of the state any more but continue to hold on to him to sign off on projects that consolidate their control. This paper argues that instead of a failed state, a two-headed system has emerged, with Iran and Russia each pushing for their own vision of the country.
Topic:: Imperialism, Fragile/Failed State, Authoritarianism, Military Intervention, and Repression
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, Iran, Middle East, Syria, and Damascus

131. Iran-US tension and the Ghost of War

Author:: Dlawer Ala'Aldeen
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
Abstract:: The latest tension between Iran and the United States has created an unhealthy debate among local actors in Iraq and the wider Middle East, reflecting minimal insight into Washington or Tehran’s policy environment. This in itself can be extremely detrimental to their own national agenda as well as the overall dynamics. The question here is: where is this US-Iran escalation leading and what policy would be best for the local players in Iraq (and elsewhere) to pursue?
Topic:: Diplomacy, Imperialism, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: United States, Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Tehran, Washington, and D.C.

132. Russia in the Middle East: Jack of All Trades, Master of None

Author:: Eugene Rumer
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:: The 2015 Russian military intervention in Syria was a pivotal moment for Moscow’s Middle East policy. Largely absent from the Middle East for the better part of the previous two decades, Russia intervened to save Bashar al-Assad’s regime and reasserted itself as a major player in the region’s power politics. Moscow’s bold use of military power positioned it as an important actor in the Middle East. The intervention took place against the backdrop of a United States pulling back from the Middle East and growing uncertainty about its future role there. The geopolitical realignment and instability caused by the civil wars in Libya and Syria and the rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia have opened opportunities for Russia to rebuild some of the old relationships and to build new ones. The most dramatic turnaround in relations in recent years has occurred between Russia and Israel. The new quality of the relationship owes a great deal to the personal diplomacy between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but Russia’s emergence as a major presence in Syria has meant that the Israelis now have no choice but to maintain good relations with their new “neighbor.” Some Israeli officials hope that Moscow will help them deal with the biggest threat they face from Syria—Iran and its client Hezbollah. So far, Russia has delivered some, but far from all that Israel wants from it, and there are precious few signs that Russia intends to break with Iran, its partner and key ally in Syria. Russian-Iranian relations have undergone an unusual transformation as a result of the Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war. Their joint victory is likely to lead to a divergence of their interests. Russia is interested in returning Syria to the status quo ante and reaping the benefits of peace and reconstruction. Iran is interested in exploiting Syria as a platform in its campaign against Israel. Russia lacks the military muscle and the diplomatic leverage to influence Iran. That poses a big obstacle to Moscow’s ambitions in the Middle East.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Geopolitics, and Military Intervention
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

133. Iranian Public Opinion under “Maximum Pressure”

Author:: Nancy Gallagher, Ebrahim Mohseni, and Clay Ramsay
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:: The Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM) has been conducting in- depth surveys of Iranian public opinion on nuclear policy, regional security, economics, domestic politics, and other topics since the summer of 2014. Each survey includes a combination of trend-line questions, some going as far back as 2006, and new questions written to assess and inform current policy debates. This report covers findings from three surveys fielded in May, August, and early October 2019 to evaluate how the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign is affecting public opinion in Iran. The United States withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May 2018, and began re-imposing sanctions on Iran that the Obama administration had lifted under the terms of the 2015 agreement it had negotiated with Iran, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. In the fall of 2018, it blacklisted hundreds of Iranian entities and threatened to impose secondary sanctions on anyone who did business with them. In spring of 2019, it tried to prevent Iran from getting any revenue from oil sales, its main export, by ending exemptions for key customers. In the summer of 2019, it tightened constraints on Iran’s access to the international financial system, including channels that had been used to pay for medicines and other humanitarian goods that were officially exempted from earlier sanctions. It also sanctioned Iran’s foreign minister, complicating his ability to interact with U.S. officials, experts, and media figures. The Trump administration’s stated objective is to keep imposing more sanctions until Iran acquiesces to a long list of U.S. demands articulated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The original twelve points include the types of restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program that the government rejected during previous negotiations and that the Iranian public has consistently opposed. It also includes stopping development of nuclear-capable missiles, ending support for various groups throughout the Middle East, halting cyberattacks and other threatening activities, and releasing all U.S. and allied detainees. Pompeo subsequently added other demands related to civil liberties in Iran. The Iranian public enthusiastically supported the JCPOA when it was first signed, partly due to unrealistic expectations about how much and how quickly economic benefits would materialize. After the International Atomic Energy Agency certified in January 2016 that Iran had met all of its nuclear obligations and implementation of sanctions relief began, foreign companies were slow to ramp up permissible trade with Iran or to make major investments there before they knew how the next U.S. president would view the JCPOA. By the end of the Obama administration few Iranians said that they had seen any economic benefits from the deal and most lacked confidence that the other signatories would uphold their obligations. But a solid majority of Iranians (55%) still approved of the agreement.
Topic:: Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

134. Israel and Iran in the Age of Trump: Israeli Perspectives

Author:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:: On 2 March 2019 Pugwash held a roundtable in Tel Aviv in cooperation with the Israeli Pugwash Group and the Alliance Center for Iranian Studies, University of Tel Aviv. More than 25 participants including former officials, academics, and members of civil society attended, including a small number from Europe, the US and Russia. Discussion broadly focused on the situation in the Middle East and the role of the United States and Russia, as well as China, and with a particular focus on Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. Many Israelis continue to have serious concerns regarding the entrenchment of Iranian influence and the extent of their force projection toward the Levant. Equally, many Israelis were keen to understand the nature of the Russian-Iranian relationship, most acutely expressed through their cooperation in Syria in recent years, and how the direction of US policy appears to be evolving in the region. In general, it was observed that the prevailing tensions in the region – with ongoing conflict in Syria and Yemen, the isolation of Qatar amongst many Arab countries, and the deepening rivalry between Iran and other countries – should be viewed through the lens of the lack of communication between officials and non-officials across the spectrum of complex issues.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America

135. Tehran Meeting on JCPOA

Author:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:: On 23-24 June 2019 a delegation from Pugwash travelled to Iran to participate in a specially-arranged two-day meeting organized together with the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) in Tehran. The central focus of the discussions was the current status of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more than one year after the United States withdrew from implementing it, and the ensuing program of ever-tightening sanctions imposed by the US on Iran that has dramatically increased tension in the Middle East. The meeting also put this into context by looking at the regional situation of arms control, as well as Iran’s relations with China, Russia, the EU, and its neighbours including Afghanistan.
Topic:: Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

136. Tehran Meeting on JCPOA

Author:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:: On 23-24 June 2019 a delegation from Pugwash travelled to Iran to participate in a specially-arranged two-day meeting organized together with the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) in Tehran. The central focus of the discussions was the current status of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more than one year after the United States withdrew from implementing it, and the ensuing program of ever-tightening sanctions imposed by the US on Iran that has dramatically increased tension in the Middle East. The meeting also put this into context by looking at the regional situation of arms control, as well as Iran’s relations with China, Russia, the EU, and its neighbours including Afghanistan.
Topic:: Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, European Union, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Asia, North America, and United States of America

137. The Rising Crisis between the United States and Iran

Author:: Amos Yadlin
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:: After a year in which Iran opted for "strategic patience," in the hope that European nations would compensate for the United States sanctions, it now seeks to present a price tag for the US measures against it, and has thus embarked on a response comprising action in three realms: nuclear, military, and oil exports from the Gulf. In the current circumstances, Iran and the United States are demanding conditions that would make a resumption of negotiations difficult, although both sides apparently understand that dialogue may ultimately be the less dangerous option for them. The latest developments embody the potential for escalation and miscalculation that is liable to affect Israel's security, and therefore the security cabinet should convene to craft an appropriate policy for the near, medium, and long terms.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Oil, Military Strategy, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, and North America

138. Does Hezbollah Want a War with Israel Now?

Author:: Orna Mizrahi and Yoram Schweitzer
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:: Voices in the Arab media have recently suggested that war between Israel and Hezbollah may erupt this coming summer. This debate began even before the rise in tension between the United States and Iran in the Gulf, which once again brought to the fore the possibility of Iran using Hezbollah as a proxy against Israel. In recent speeches, however, Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah acted quickly to calm the waters, while delivering messages designed to deter Israel from taking measures against Hezbollah. Nasrallah asserted that Hezbollah was capable of striking strategic sites on the Israeli home front and conquering parts of the Galilee. These statements indicate that as far as Hezbollah is concerned, the current circumstances are not convenient for a conflict with Israel, due to Hezbollah's continuing involvement in the war in Syria and a wish to avoid undermining Hezbollah's recent achievements in the Lebanese political system. Also important is Hezbollah's deepening economic plight, resulting in part from American sanctions against the organization and its patron, Iran, although these economic difficulties have not yet affected Hezbollah's continued investment in its military buildup and deployment for a future war with Israel. Nevertheless, even if Hezbollah has no interest in a large scale conflict with Israel at this time, escalation as a result of particular measures by Israel in Lebanon and the organization's response, or from Hezbollah's own actions against Israel aimed at serving Iranian interests, cannot be ruled out. Israel must therefore prepare in advance for the possibility of a military campaign in the north.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Hezbollah, and Armed Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Persian Gulf

139. Russia and Iran: Is the Syrian Honeymoon Over?

Author:: Udi Dekel and Carmit Valensi
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:: The rescue of Bashar al-Assad’s regime by the pro-Assad coalition, comprising Russia, Iran, and Iranian proxies, led to the victory of the regime over the rebels; the coalition’s achievements stem primarily from the effective cooperation between Iran and Russia since 2015 in fighting the rebels. Now, with the battles over, despite shared interests in consolidating the Assad regime, inherent tensions between Russia and Iran regarding influence in Syria have emerged in greater relief. Yet despite the disagreements, this it is not a zero-sum game between Russia and Iran. Both continue to cooperate on a range of issues in the Syrian arena and beyond. Iran for its part continues to see its consolidation in Syria as a strategic objective, and despite difficulties that have emerged, it seems that Tehran remains determined to continue, even if to a lesser extent than originally planned. After the success of Israel’s military actions to halt Iran’s military consolidation in Syria, Jerusalem should maximize the political potential and the shared interest of Russia and the United States to stabilize the situation in Syria, and to reduce Iran’s influence and capabilities in the country.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, and Syria

140. The United States’ Soft War with Iran

Author:: Seth G. Jones
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: Iran is engaged in a soft war, or jang-e narm, with the United States. Iran uses formal and informal means to influence populations across the globe and has expanded its information campaign utilizing the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, cultural centers, universities, and charitable foundations. But Iran’s authoritarian political system and attempts to control access to information make it vulnerable to a U.S. and Western information campaign. Iran’s weaknesses suggest that a major component of U.S. competition with Tehran should be ideological.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Conflict, Ideology, and Disinformation
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

141. Dangerous Liaisons: Russian Cooperation with Iran in Syria

Author:: Seth G. Jones, Nicholas Harrington, and Joseph S. Bermudez Jr.
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: As tensions escalate between the United States and Iran in the Middle East, Russia is engaged in covert and overt cooperation with Iran in ways that undermine U.S. national security interests. This analysis of commercial satellite imagery at Tiyas Airbase in Syria indicates the scope and proximity of Russian and Iranian military ties. If Washington wants to contain Tehran and prevent further Iranian expansion, U.S. policymakers will need to increase pressure on Moscow to curb Tehran’s activities in countries like Syria.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Intelligence, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

142. Iran May be the Threat but Iraq is the Prize

Author:: Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: It is all too tempting to focus narrowly on the maritime crisis in the Gulf, and the potential threat to the flow of petroleum and the world’s economy. This is where the daily headlines focus, and some form of threat is all too real. In practice, however, the U.S. already faces other threats in the region and from Iran, and at least one is potentially far more serious in grand strategic terms. These “other threats” include Yemen, Syria, and the failures of the Arab Gulf states to unite in creating an effective defense against Iran. Most importantly, they include the U.S. and Arab struggle with Iran for influence in the Gulf.
Topic:: Energy Policy, Oil, Maritime, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

143. Achilles’ Heel: Adding Resilience to NATO’s Fragile Missile Shield

Author:: Ian Williams
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: Tensions with Iran are once again increasing. The slow implosion of the nuclear accord, Iran’s harassment of cargo ships, and the downing of a U.S. unmanned aircraft have made plain the risk of conflict between Iran and the United States. The dispute should also draw attention to the questionable preparedness of the United States and its allies to fight a war with Iran on short notice and deal with that war’s blowback across the Middle East and Europe. Regional missile defense architectures are an important part of that preparedness. Iran has the largest and most diverse supply of ballistic missiles in the Middle East region, and Tehran has shown an ability and willingness to use them in combat operations.1 Iran is also learning to employ other kinds of aerial threats, such as long-range cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). In a conflict with Iran, U.S. and allied forces would likely face a wide spectrum of air and missile threats. The biggest U.S. investment in Iran-centric missile defenses has been the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA). EPAA is a phased buildup of U.S. missile defense assets in and around Europe to deter and, if necessary, limit damage from an Iranian missile attack on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Yet the EPAA architecture is heavily dependent on the nominal, unencumbered performance of a single radar deployed relatively close to Iran. This produces a single point of failure susceptible to malfunction or operator error. It also presents an Achilles’ heel that a determined or imaginative adversary could exploit. Iran certainly fits both descriptors. In 1958, strategist Albert Wohlstetter wrote that U.S. confidence in its nuclear second-strike ability was achieved only by “ignoring the full range of sensible enemy plans.”2 This same critical judgment should be applied to confidence in the EPAA as currently configured. Inasmuch as a sensible adversary such as Iran relies upon its missile forces to achieve its defense goals, it should be credited with the foresight to target single points of failure that would preclude the effective application of that missile force. Fortunately, there are practical steps that NATO and the United States can take to further adapt EPAA for greater resiliency. Upgrades to existing radars, the integration of allied radars into the missile defense mission, and the addition of air and space-based sensors would do much to improve EPAA’s capability and survivability, improving U.S. and NATO preparedness for an unexpected Middle East conflict.
Topic:: Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Missile Defense
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, North Atlantic, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

144. Iran’s Threat to Saudi Critical Infrastructure: The Implications of U.S.-Iranian Escalation

Author:: Seth G. Jones, Danika Newlee, Nicholas Harrington, and Joseph S. Bermudez Jr.
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: Tensions between Iran and the United States have heightened concerns about the threat to critical infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, including in Saudi Arabia. This report argues that while Saudi Arabia has vulnerabilities in its oil, desalination, electricity, SCADA, shipping, and other systems, Iran has thus far adopted a calibrated approach. Tehran has conducted irregular attacks to infrastructure using offensive cyber weapons, naval ships to impede oil tankers, and partners like the Houthis in Yemen. The United States should focus on deterring further Iranian escalation, refraining from actions that threaten the regime’s survival, and providing a political “off ramp” for Iran to de-escalate.
Topic:: Energy Policy, Oil, Natural Resources, and Infrastructure
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Saudi Arabia

145. The United States-Iran standoff: Recent tensions are symptomatic of President Trump’s broader foreign-policy approach

Author:: Ville Sinkkonen
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: The heightened tensions between the United States and Iran should be understood in the context of the Trump administration’s broader foreign policy approach. Even if neither side wants a military confrontation, the “maximum pressure” campaign by the US has raised the risk of a potential miscalculation.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, and North America

146. Sanctions and US foreign policy in the Trump era: A perfect storm

Author:: Ville Sinkkonen
Publication Date:: 09-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: A newfound focus on great-power competition has brought geoeconomics to the forefront of strategic thinking in Washington D.C. The United States is well positioned to use coercive economic tools, particularly unilateral sanctions, in this game because of its structural advantages in the global economy and financial system. President Donald Trump and his administration have also signalled a preference for the unilateral use of sanctions to excel in the competitive international geostrategic environment and confront “rogue regimes”. Meanwhile, wrangling between Congress and the White House over sanctions policy has intensified since the 2016 presidential election. These systemic, policymaker-bounded and domestic-political factors have created a perfect storm in US sanctions policy. While the US may be able to pursue sanctions unilaterally in the short term, in the long run this may dissuade allies from cooperating and erode America’s structural advantages as other states resort to hedging.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Sanctions
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, and North America

147. US foreign policy tools in the era of disinformation: Deficiencies prevent effective response to malign information operations

Author:: Deborah A. McCarthy
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: Russia, China, Iran and ISIS use information operations to undermine the national security objectives of the United States and its allies. However, the US’s international response has been weak. Internal constraints have limited more effective counter-measures. In particular, the lack of a coordinated White House-level strategy, dispersed authorities and little cooperation with private social media companies can be identified as causal factors. Additional steps by the Trump Administration to counter foreign disinformation will aim to protect the 2020 presidential elections rather than to push back on efforts to undermine US leadership abroad.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Science and Technology, ISIS, Social Media, and Disinformation
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Asia, and North America

148. Iran’s Land Route: A Strategic Threat

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 01-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Iran is taking advantage of the crises created by ISIS and the Arab Spring to advance its land route project from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea. The American withdrawal from Syria will remove one of the obstacles that stand in Iran’s path, yet Israel has demonstrated its determination to prevent the establishment of this route.
Topic:: Security, Military Strategy, Economic Cooperation, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Syria, and Mediterranean

149. Iran’s Strategy for Control of Syria

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: One way Iran’s efforts are taking place are below the official Syrian state structures – in the arming and sponsoring of Iran-controlled paramilitary formations on Syria soil.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

150. Iranian Economic Failure Spoils 40th Anniversary Celebrations

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The Iranian media claimed that millions filled the streets on the 40th anniversary of the Iranian revolution. The opposition, however says that fewer people participated. Iran’s nuclear program will not protect the regime against the people’s antipathy.
Topic:: Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Economic Policy, and State Media
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

151. Syria’s Return to the Arab Fold

Author:: Joshua Krasna
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Arab countries are re-normalizing their relations with the Assad regime, seeking to balance the strong Iranian and Turkish influences in Syria and to achieve some degree of influence in a new Syrian political-strategic structure. This further cements a Russian-oriented strategic architecture in the region. In the long term, this could lead to tensions between conservative Arab states and Israel, if Israel targets the Syrian military and government in the campaign against Iran, or if Israel continues to promote diplomatic recognition of its Golan annexation.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Governance, Normalization, and Annexation
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Asia, and Syria

152. Zarif Defeated at Home

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 02-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The attempted resignation of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif didn’t come as a complete surprise. It reflects the utter supremacy of the Revolutionary Guard in the Iranian political sphere.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Governance, and Leadership
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

153. Iranian-Russian Cooperation in Yemen

Author:: Micky Aharonson and Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The Houthi rebellion in Yemen, with its horrendous consequences for the country’s civilian population, is being instigated primarily by Iranian assistance and direction for the rebels, together with Russian growing involvement in the conflict. An end to the fighting therefore depends to a large extent on the willingness of external countries to continue their fomenting of the conflict.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Yemen

154. European Appeasement of Iran Endangers National Security in Europe

Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The EU’s insistence on preserving the nuclear agreement with Iran and its persistent efforts to establish a mechanism for evading American trade sanctions are encouraging Iran to escalate its subversion throughout Europe.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Appeasement
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, and Middle East

155. Iran Strengthens its Land Route to Damascus

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 04-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The Iranian “corridor” is a central project for the mullahs in Iraq and Syria, involving a highway which would connect Tehran with Damascus.
Topic:: Infrastructure, Hegemony, Strategic Stability, and Roads
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

156. Will Iran Retaliate against the US for Designating the IRGC as a Terrorist Organization?

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Iran is not likely to target American troops, since Teheran’s strategy is to wait-out the Trump administration.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, Conflict, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

157. Iranian Missiles in the Iraqi Desert

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: In the remote deserts of western Iraq, Iran’s servants are busily at work preparing a new front against Israel.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Missile Defense
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

158. Iran’s Struggle to Entrench Itself in Syria

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 05-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel, Russia and to some extent the US stand in the way of Iran’s permanent entrenchment in Syria. Israel needs to continue its strikes against Iranian and Hezbollah infrastructures across Syria.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Counter-terrorism, Conflict, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Syria

159. Crisis between Iran and the US: Implications for Israel

Author:: Eran Lerman and Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel needs to be prepared for potentially dramatic consequences, including rapid deterioration towards confrontation on all Israel’s borders. Resilience and readiness to act can serve to deter provocations by Iran’s proxies. Ultimately, only a credible military threat from Israel will indicate to friend and foe alike that in a showdown, Iran will be forced to back down.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

160. The Greatest Necessity: National Cohesion

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel’s government must nurture a spirit of unity and national purpose by building a policy consensus as broad as possible. This is necessary both in preparation for likely combat operations against Iran and its proxies, and in order to respond wisely to the American peace plan and to intelligently manage conflict with the Palestinians.
Topic:: Nationalism, Military Strategy, Governance, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, North America, and United States of America

161. Erdoğan is Not Invulnerable

Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The US, Europe and Israel can force a modification in Erdoğan’s conduct on a wide range of issues, including his duplicity on Iran, support for Hamas in Gaza, subversion in Jerusalem, intervention in Libya, aggression towards Cypriot gas explorations, threats to Kurds of Rojava, and repression at home.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Hegemony, Authoritarianism, Leadership, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Asia

162. Expose the Misdeeds of Iran’s Foreign Ministry

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 07-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: It is complicit in Hizballah’s terrorism and subversion, in Europe and the US.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Conflict, Hezbollah, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

163. Beware Precipitous Talks with Iran

Author:: David M. Weinberg
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign must not be curtailed before Iran’s leaders truly have no choice but to capitulate to Western demands.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

164. A Stronger Mediterranean Partnership: Why More Than Gas is at Stake

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel, Egypt, Greece and Cyprus must encourage the US to assert a higher military and diplomatic profile as a counterweight to Turkish pressures, Russian and Iranian ambitions, and Chinese inroads.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Energy Policy, Military Strategy, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Asia, North America, Egypt, Cyprus, and United States of America

165. When you leave the Middle East, do it with a big bang

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: American withdrawal from the Middle East must be accompanied by steps that reduce the general impression of a weak US going home in defeat. President Trump should bomb Iran’s nuclear installations.
Topic:: Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

166. The Iran-Israel War Is Here

Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: More than a decade of civil strife has opened up the region for the escalating state-to-state conflict.
Topic:: Nuclear Weapons, War, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

167. How Israel Will Prevent Trump Appeasing Iran

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 09-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Deadlock between Washington and Tehran won’t easily turn into détente even if Trump and Rohani do find a way to meet in New York. However, even a tentative rapprochement between the US and Iran would severely strain Israel’s close ties with the White House.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Rivalry, and Appeasement
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

168. Can a Chinese-Iranian Deal be Averted?

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Chinese investment in Iran would help Tehran withstand US economic pressures, and exacerbate the Western crisis with Iran
Topic:: International Cooperation, Investment, Economic Diplomacy, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: China, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Asia, North America, and United States of America

169. Iran Creating More Hezbollahs Across the Middle East

Author:: Yaakov Amidror
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Escalating tensions with Iran should be a warning that Tehran’s strategy of training and arming proxy terror groups throughout the Middle East is not being countered aggressively enough.
Topic:: Terrorism, Conflict, Hezbollah, and State Sponsored Terrorism
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

170. The Lessons of Betrayal in Northern Syria

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The move confirms that the current US administration is not interested in heading an alliance of regional forces against Iranian expansionism or Sunni political Islam, but is, like its predecessor, managing imperial decline.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, and Alliance
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America

171. The Turkish Invasion of Northeast Syria

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 10-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: While a determined Western-led effort to halt the Turkish invasion could still prevent Russian, Iranian and IS gains, time is growing short.
Topic:: Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Islamic State, Conflict, and Foreign Interference
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America

172. Escalation with Iran and its Satellites is Not an Empty Threat

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: If it weren’t for the Iranian regime’s distress, it might decide to tread water until US President Trump was out of office. But its resources are limited, and the possibility that the ayatollahs might attack Israel out of desperation is very real.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

173. Revolt Against Iran’s ‘System’ in Iraq and Lebanon

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Will the people succeed in undermining the Iranian plan to spread power across the region?
Topic:: Social Movement, Fragile States, Protests, and Revolution
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and Lebanon

174. Northern Syria and Israel

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel must adapt as quickly as possible to the evolving situation in northern Syria, while continuing to adhere to self-reliance and invest in its military.
Topic:: Civil War, Military Strategy, Hegemony, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

175. Israel, Europe and Russia: A New Paradigm?

Author:: Emmanuel Navon
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel is expected by its European interlocutors to condemn Putin over his misdeeds, yet Israel wants to avoid frictions with Russia in order to maintain a free hand to operate against Iranian targets in Syria.
Topic:: International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, Foreign Interference, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

176. Making the Best of US Withdrawal from Syria

Author:: Aiman Mansour
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Given Iran’s presence in Syria, Israel must employ focused, operative rhetoric and policy versus the strategic threats it faces.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Hegemony, Foreign Interference, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America

177. Norm and Dissidence: Egyptian Shiʿa between Security Approaches and Geopolitical Stakes

Author:: Stéphane Valter
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for International and Regional Studies (CIRS), Georgetown University in Qatar
Abstract:: This paper presents a study of Egyptian Shiʿism by providing historical context as well as a focus on actual or current issues. The study includes a historical overview of local Shiʿism (Fatimid period, late nineteenth century, 1940s–1960s, and contemporary period); Shiʿi institutions and personalities; the situation following Egypt’s 2011 revolution; the hectic one-year government of the Muslim Brotherhood (2012–2013); President al-Sisi’s authoritarian takeover; and, finally, an exploration of the current geopolitical stakes, focusing mainly on the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran over religious hegemony.
Topic:: Religion, Social Movement, Hegemony, Arab Spring, Shia, Muslim Brotherhood, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Africa, Iran, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt

178. War by Proxy: Iran’s Growing Footprint in the Middle East

Author:: Seth G. Jones
Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: There is growing Iranian activism in the Middle East despite U.S. and allied efforts to weaken Iran’s economy and politically isolate Tehran. There has been an increase in the size and capabilities of militias supported by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-Quds Force in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen collectively. Iran is also working to establish a land bridge across the region. Nevertheless, Iran has weaknesses and vulnerabilities that can be exploited by the United States and its partners.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, and Regional Power
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

179. Korea, the JCPOA, and the Shifting Military Balance in the Gulf

Author:: Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:: 03-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: The analysis concludes that the sudden breakdown in the latest round of U.S.-Korean nuclear arms control talks in Vietnam should scarcely come as a surprise to anyone. Both sides sought too much too soon and did so despite a long history of previous failures. Heads of state engaged before their staffs had reached a clear compromise and did so seeking goals the other leader could not accept. It is not clear that an agreement was reachable at this point in time, but each side's search for its "best" ensured that the two sides could not compromise on the "good." This failure sent yet another warning that agreements like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear arms agreement with Iran that offers major progress in limiting a nation's nuclear weapons efforts can be far better than no agreement, and of the danger in letting the perfect become the enemy of the good. The failed U.S. negotiations with Korea sends a warning that any set of compromises that preserves Iran's compliance with the JCPOA, and creates a structure where negotiation can continue, will be better than provoking a crisis with Iran that can end in no agreement at all and alienate America's European allies in the process.
Topic:: Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Denuclearization, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

180. Russia and Iran in Syria— a Random Partnership or an Enduring Alliance?

Author:: Michel Duclos
Publication Date:: 01-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Atlantic Council
Abstract:: Russia and Iran are allies in Syria not out of mutual sympathy, but for pragmatic reasons. According to many reports, Iranian leaders—notably including Qasem Soleimani, the head of the Al-Quds force of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC)—were instrumental in convincing Vladimir Putin to send his air force to Syria and save Bashar al-Assad’s skin in September 2015
Topic:: International Affairs
Political Geography:: Russia and Iran

181. US-Iran Showdown Begins in Iraq

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Ktaib Hizballah, with its political, military, economic and mafia-like aspects, is the most potent enemy of the US and its allies in Iraq today.
Topic:: Terrorism, Military Strategy, Governance, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

182. Forecasting the Mideast in 2020

Author:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Israel must be ready to tackle Iran militarily on its own and fight a pre-emptive war with Hizballah.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Conflict, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

183. The Russian Role in World Affairs: A View from Israel

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: It would undoubtedly serve Israel’s interest for Russia to draw closer to the US on a wide range of issues, and above all, on Iran.
Topic:: Hegemony, Strategic Stability, Strategic Interests, and Intervention
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

184. American Sanctions and Military Action against Iran

Author:: Udi Levi
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: A critical point has been reached where sanctions and military conflict connect. Tehran needs and seeks a limited military confrontation with the West in order to shore-up its legitimacy at home.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Sanctions, Conflict, and Intervention
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

185. Through a Different Lens: The Mideast as Seen from Doha

Author:: Micky Aharonson
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: At a recent conference on the Mideast economy in Doha, which included the participation of Israeli scholars, discussions highlighted changes in the regional balance of power. Acceptance of Assad’s rule in Syria is growing, but so are questions about how Syria’s rehabilitation will be financed. And some Iranians are signaling that Tehran is willing to make political compromises to alleviate economic pressures.
Topic:: Economics, Leadership, Political stability, Conflict, and Academia
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Syria

186. Protests in Iran and Trump’s Maximum Pressure Campaign

Author:: Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: America must provide Iranian demonstrators with access to the Internet to bolster the protests.
Topic:: Governance, Social Movement, Leadership, Conflict, and Protests
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

187. Making the Best of US Withdrawal from Syria

Author:: Aiman Mansour
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Given Iran’s presence in Syria, Israel must employ focused, operative rhetoric and policy versus the strategic threats it faces.
Topic:: Security, Military Strategy, Hegemony, Military Intervention, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Syria, North America, and United States of America

188. Various Domains of Integration of Refugees and their Interrelationships: A Study of Recent Refugee Inflows in Austria

Author:: Michael Landesmann and Sandra Leitner
Publication Date:: 11-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:: This paper addresses the complexity of, and the interrelationships between, two important aspects of integration of refugees in Austria, namely labour market integration and social integration. While labour market integration is captured in terms of being employed as compared to being unemployed or inactive, social integration distinguishes between social networks and their ethnic composition and social capital. It identifies the key determinants of each of these domains of integration and investigates the direction as well as the size of interdependencies among them. The analysis uses a unique dataset built on the basis of a survey of about 1,600 refugees from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran who had come to Austria since 2010. The analysis establishes an important causal link between social integration and labour market integration (i.e. employment). Both social network effects with Austrians as well as with co-ethnics are important in this context but the former is more powerful than the latter. It shows that both education and length of stay are key determinants of successful labour market integration. Furthermore, tests regarding the relevance of language command for both social and labour market integration show the strong importance of speaking and understanding German, and much less so, of writing German.
Topic:: Migration, Refugees, Labor Market, and Social Integration
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iraq, Europe, Iran, South Asia, Middle East, Syria, and Austria

189. Iranians Will Not Forget.

Author:: Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Publication Date:: 08-2019
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Abstract:: Frustration with the resilience of Iran and with its ties to China and Russia have pushed the regional allies of the US – and the US itself – to renew threats against Iran. The hybrid war against Iran has included economic sanctions, sabotage, and assassinations, as well as an information war. To break through the information barrier, Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research interviewed Professor Mohammed Marandi of the University of Tehran. This conversation focuses on the unilateral US sanctions policy against Iran, on Iran’s resilience, and on Iranian relations with China and Russia.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Sanctions, Alliance, Conflict, and Resilience
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

190. Europe and Iran: The Economic and Commercial Dimensions of a Strained Relationship

Author:: Cornelius Adebahr
Publication Date:: 12-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:: Europe and Iran had begun to invest in a closer commercial relationship just when the United States withdrew from the nuclear deal in May 2018. Since then, Washington has re-imposed its stringent economic sanctions, targeting Iran’s oil exports as a major source of government revenue but also banning financial transactions with the country. This poses an enormous challenge for the EU, which had intended to use the 2015 agreement as a stepping stone to promote regional cooperation and, ultimately, a more comprehensive relationship with Iran. Paper produced in the framework of the IAI-FEPS project entitled “Europe and Iran in a fast-changing Middle East: Confidence-building measures, security dialogue and regional cooperation”, December 2018.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, Sanctions, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, Middle East, North America, United States of America, and European Union

191. Squaring the Circle Connecting Current Operations to Policy Ambition in Syria

Author:: Melissa Dalton
Publication Date:: 02-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: 2017 marked a significant shift in the two wars in Syria. Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and Coalition forces drove ISIS from its self-proclaimed caliphate capital in Raqqa, across northern Syria, and down the Euphrates River Valley. Meanwhile, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, backed by Russia and Iran, secured key population areas and strategic locations in the center and coast, and stretched to the eastern border to facilitate logistics and communications for Iranian-backed militias. In both wars, Syrian civilians have lost profoundly. They also have shown incredible resilience. Still, the outcome of both wars is inconclusive. Although major areas have been cleared of ISIS, SDF and Coalition forces are fighting the bitter remnants of ISIS in the Middle Euphrates River Valley. Enduring security in ISIS-cleared areas now depends on governance and restoration of services. Turkey’s intervention into Syrian Kurdish-controlled Afrin risks pulling the sympathetic Kurdish components of the SDF away from the counterterrorism and stabilization efforts in Syria’s east in order to fight Turkey, a U.S. ally. With a rumbling Sunni insurgency in pockets of Syria’s heartland, Assad and his supporters continue to pummel Eastern Ghouta outside Damascus and threaten Idlib. They are unleashing both conventional and chemical weapons on the remnants of Syrian opposition fighters and indiscriminately targeting civilians. The Trump administration now is attempting to connect the outcome of these two wars. The Obama administration tried similarly but ultimately prioritized the counter-ISIS mission. The drivers of the Syrian civil war and the ISIS war are rooted in the same problem: bad governance. Thus, a sensible resolution of both wars must address Syria’s governance. However, squaring U.S. policy goals with current operations and resources the United States has employed in Syria will require a degree of calibration, stitching together several lines of effort, and committing additional U.S. and international resources. Orchestrating this level of U.S. effort has proven elusive over the last six years.
Topic:: Civil War, Violent Extremism, ISIS, and Civilians
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

192. U.S. Strategy, the JCPOA Iranian Nuclear Arms Agreement, and the Gulf: Playing the Long Game

Author:: Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:: 03-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: Few recent American foreign policy decisions have been as divisive as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear arms control agreement with Iran. Advocates of the agreement have focused far too exclusively on its potential benefits. Opponents equally exclusively on its potential faults. Both sides tend to forget that any feasible arms control agreement between what are hostile sides tends to be a set of compromises that are an extension of arms races and potential conflicts by other means. As a result, imperfect agreements with uncertain results are the rule, not the exception. President Trump has made it clear that he opposes the agreement and would like to terminate it. His dismissal of Rex Tillerson as Security of State, and his replacement by Mike Pompeo – along with his dismissal of General H.R. McMaster and replacement with John Bolton – indicate that President Trump may well seek to terminate the agreement in the near future – action which might or might not have significant bipartisan support. He faces a May 5th to decide whether to again waive economic sanction against Iran, a decision which comes up for renewal every 120 days.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Deterrence, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

193. Developing a Containment Strategy in Syria

Author:: Seth G. Jones
Publication Date:: 05-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: The Issue Some U.S. policymakers have argued that the United States should withdraw its military forces from Syria. But the United States has several interests in Syria: Balancing against Iran, including deterring Iranian forces and militias from pushing close to the Israeli border, disrupting Iranian lines of communication through Syria, preventing substantial military escalation between Israel and Iran, and weakening Shia proxy forces. Balancing against Russia, including deterring further Russian expansion in the Middle East from Syrian territory and raising the costs—including political costs—of Russian operations in Syria. Preventing a terrorist resurgence, including targeting Salafi-jihadist groups like the Islamic State and al Qaeda that threaten the United States and its allies. Our Recommendations: Based on U.S. interests in Syria, Washington should establish a containment strategy that includes the following components: Retain a small military and intelligence footprint that includes working with—and providing limited training, funding, and equipment to—groups in eastern, northern, and southern Syria, such as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Coordinate with regional allies such as Jordan and Israel to balance against Iran and Russia and to prevent the resurgence of Salafi-jihadists. Pressure outside states to end support to Salafi-jihadists, including Turkey and several Gulf states. As the war in Syria moves into its seventh year, U.S. policymakers have struggled to agree on a clear Syria strategy. Some U.S. policymakers have argued that the United States needs to withdraw its military forces from Syria. “I want to get out,” President Trump said of the United States’ military engagement in Syria. “I want to bring our troops back home.”1 Others have urged caution, warning that a precipitous withdrawal could contribute to a resurgence of terrorism or allow U.S. competitors like Iran and Russia—along with their proxies—to fill the vacuum.2 In addition, some administration officials have argued that the Islamic State has been decimated in Syria and Iraq. The National Security Strategy notes that “we crushed Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terrorists on the battlefields of Syria and Iraq.”3 But between 5,000 and 12,000 Islamic State fighters remain in Syria and continue to conduct guerrilla attacks, along with between 40,000 and 70,000 Salafi-jihadist fighters in Syria overall.4
Topic:: Civil War, Terrorism, Military Strategy, and Military Intervention
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

194. The Uncertain Iraqi Election: The Need for a New U.S. Strategy

Author:: Anthony H Cordesman
Publication Date:: 06-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: The Iraqi election in May 2018 has both highlighted Iraq's political uncertainties and the security challenges the United States now faces in Iraq and the Middle East. What initially appeared to be a relative honest election gradually emerged to have involved massive potential fraud, and forced a manual recount of the results of a failed electronic voting system. Its results have cast Iraq's ability to form an effective post-ISIS government into serious doubt, along with its ability to carry our follow-up provincial and local elections in October. At the same time, even the initial results of the election raised serious concerns over the level of future U.S. confrontation with Iran. The United States faced grave uncertainties regarding Iran's influence in Iraq even when it seemed that Iraq's existing Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi, was likely to win the election. The election's uncertain results, and U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear agreement, now virtually ensure that a far more intense struggle for influence will take place in Iraq and the rest of the region.
Topic:: Elections, Democracy, ISIS, Election watch, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: United States, Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

195. The Escalating Conflict with Hezbollah in Syria

Author:: Seth G. Jones
Publication Date:: 06-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: The Issue: Hezbollah and Iran have accumulated a substantial amount of weapons and fighters in Syria that pose a threat to the United States and its allies in the region. In response, Israel has conducted a growing number of strikes against Iranian, Hezbollah and other targets in Syria. An escalating war has the potential to cause significant economic damage, lead to high numbers of civilian casualties and internally displaced persons, and involve more countries in the region than did the 2006 Lebanon War. The stakes are high, making it critical for Washington to help prevent such an escalation.
Topic:: Terrorism, Violent Extremism, Syrian War, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

196. Hezbollah’s Missiles and Rockets

Author:: Shaan Shaikh and Ian Williams
Publication Date:: 07-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: Hezbollah is a Lebanese political party and militant group with close ties to Iran and Syria’s Assad regime. It is the world’s most heavily armed non-state actor—aptly described as “a militia trained like an army and equipped like a state.”1 This is especially true with regard to its missile and rocket forces, which Hezbollah has arrayed against Israel in vast quantities. The party’s arsenal is comprised primarily of small, man-portable, unguided artillery rockets. Although these devices lack precision, their sheer number make them effective weapons of terror. According to Israeli sources, Hezbollah held around 15,000 rockets and missiles on the eve of the 2006 Lebanon War, firing nearly 4,000 at Israel over the 34-day conflict. Hezbollah has since expanded its rocket force, today estimated at 130,000 rounds.2 Hezbollah asserts that its rocket forces are primarily for deterrence—a means to retaliate against Israel in the event of conflict. In May 2006, Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah explained “The purpose of our rockets is to deter Israel from attacking Lebanese civilians…The enemy fears that every time he confronts us, whenever there are victims in our ranks among Lebanese civilians, this will lead to a counter-barrage of our rockets, which he fears.”3 Indiscriminate rocket fire, particularly from small, easily transportable launchers makes the suppression of fire with airpower more challenging. This forces Israel to rely more heavily on ground forces in a conflict. Lacking any air force of its own, Hezbollah prefers ground wars in its own territory to bombardment from the skies. As Human Rights Watch notes, however, none of these arguments justifies targeting civilians under international law.4 The continued growth of Hezbollah’s missile and rocket forces is undesirable for several reasons. It may, for example, embolden the party to overstep Israeli red lines. Hezbollah’s push to acquire longer-ranged and precision-guided munitions could likewise spur Israel into preemptive action. Hezbollah’s weapons acquisition also raises the prospects for the proliferation of missile technology and know-how. According to Saudi and UAE officials, Hezbollah militants have worked with their Houthi forces in rocket development and launch divisions in Yemen.5 Hezbollah forces in Syria and Iraq similarly operate with various Shiite militias. Growing relations among these groups presents risks for the dissemination of missile technology and knowledge. The following is a summary compilation of Hezbollah’s missile and rocket arsenal. It is limited by the availability of public source information and does not cover certain topics such as rocket strategies, evolution, or storage locations. This brief instead focuses on the acquisition history, capabilities, and use of these forces.
Topic:: Non State Actors, Violent Extremism, Missile Defense, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon

197. Iran Sanctions at the Halfway Point

Author:: Sarah Ladislaw and Frank A. Verrastro
Publication Date:: 08-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:: On May 8, President Trump announced the U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement endorsed by Iran, the United States, France, Germany, China, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Concurrent with that action, Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 2012 (NDAA) was reactivated, along with other U.S. sanctions under the Iran Freedom and Counter-proliferation Act (IFCA), the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA), and the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (ITRSHRA). Departments and agencies are implementing these sanctions with 90-day and 180-day wind down periods, after which time the applicable sanctions come back into full effect.1 Since May, administration officials from several agencies have been travelling around the world to explain the rationale for the decision to pull out of the JCPOA and persuade countries to comply with the sanctions program. Earlier this week (following the end of the first 90-day wind down period), the administration announced that on August 7 sanctions would be reimposed on: Iran’s automotive sector; Activities related to the issuance of sovereign debt; Transactions related to the Iranian rial; Iran’s trade in gold and other precious metals; Graphite, aluminum, steel, coal, and software used in industrial processes; The acquisition of U.S. bank notes by the government of Iran.
Topic:: Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: United States, Iran, Middle East, and Israel

198. Iran in Syria: Decision-Making Actors, Interests and Priorities

Author:: Hamidreza Azizi
Publication Date:: 10-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: Discussion paper for the workshop on: “The emerging security dynamics and the political settlement in Syria”, Syracuse, Italy, 18-19 October 2018. Since the onset of the Syrian crisis in 2011, Iran has provided political, economic and military support to save a friendly government in Damascus and has become a key component of the Syrian equation. Syria’s location in the Levant places it at the heart of the Iranian national security doctrine, as Syria is key to maintaining land access to Hezbollah in Lebanon, preventing terrorism from destabilising Iran, and challenging the dominance of Iran’s rivals in Syria. However, achieving these goals in Syria is problematic in both the short and long term. Despite their agreement on preserving the Assad government, Tehran is not in full agreement with Moscow and Damascus on a post war political system, the role of Iranian forces, Syrian-Israeli relations, and reconstruction policies and contracts. Despite the strong positions against the US and the Syrian opposition, Iran is ready to compromise in Syria. Iran has become more accepting of the Syrian opposition playing a role in the future political structure, but such an acceptance is defined by their real power on the ground and conditioned by respecting Iran’s interests in Syria. Once the West is ready to accept Iran’s interests in Syria and include Iran in the UN peace process in Geneva, the Islamic Republic could relax its positions on post-war political and military structures, which would significantly contribute to ensuring a peaceful political transition in Syria.
Topic:: Bilateral Relations, Conflict, and Syrian War
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

199. Russian Forces in Syria and the Building of a Sustainable Military Presence: What About Iranian-backed Syrian Militias?

Author:: Alimar Lazkani
Publication Date:: 07-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Arab Reform Initiative (ARI)
Abstract:: There is constant talk of the “soft conflict” between Iran and Russia in Syria. Most research and media reports focus on the areas of influence and control of each party. Without going into the relationship between Iranian and Russian forces on Syrian soil, in which the Iranian of influence weakened following the entry of Russian troops, it is important to distinguish the nature of these two forces to help identify the characteristics of this conflict, which are not limited to areas of influence. In fact, there is a clear difference between Iranian and Russian interests as well as strategy on two major issues. The first is the relationship with Israel. While Russia sees Israel as a strategic ally in the region, Iran gains its regional legitimacy by emphasizing the continuity of conflict with it. The second is the way each party sees the future of Syria, and its own role in it. Iran is not capable of establishing a centralized state in Syria because of its ideological hostility to the Sunni majority there. Therefore, a state based on sectarian militias will be the cornerstone of Iran’s continued presence on Syrian soil as it has the capacity to manage militias with no national project. Russia, on the other hand, has a vision of a centralized state that is based on the fundamental pillar of a disciplined and dutiful army. Thus, the “soft conflict” involves not only the geographical divvying-up of Syria, but also fundamental matters related to the structure of Syria’s security and military system. This paper is the second part of a broader study of Russia’s policy of establishing a military influence in Syria. It will look at the Syrian militias that Iran has fostered and supported, and Russia’s approach in dealing with them on the ground. However, it does not consider non-Syrian militias on Syrian soil brought by the Iranians, such as Hezbollah, the Fatemiyoun, the Zainabiyoun, and other Shia militias because of their close association with Iranian politics and their temporary posting in specific conflict areas, making them a foreign presence on Syrian soil.
Topic:: Military Strategy, Military Intervention, Sunni, and Shia
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

200. Are Iran’s ballistic missiles designed to be nuclear capable?

Author:: Michael Elleman and Mark T. Fitzpatrick
Publication Date:: 02-2018
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: International Institute for Strategic Studies
Abstract:: Iran has the largest and most diverse ballistic-missile arsenal in the Middle East – could these systems one day be used to launch nuclear weapons? In a new report, IISS analysts Michael Elleman and Mark Fitzpatrick offer a detailed assessment of the design intentions behind each missile within Iran’s inventory. The result is a clear picture as to which platforms the United States and its allies should seek to remove, and which ones can be discounted. The common claim that Iran’s missile development must be stopped altogether because these systems could deliver nuclear weapons in the future rests on broad generalisations. While there is reason for concern, priority attention should be given to those missiles that might realistically be used for such a purpose, if Iran were to go down a perilous nuclear path. The international standard – but not treaty – for determining the inherent nuclear capability of missiles is the threshold developed in 1987 by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), which seeks to forestall exports of missile systems able to deliver a 500kg payload a distance of 300km or more. Eight of Iran’s 13 current ballistic missile systems – the largest and most diverse arsenal in the Middle East – exceed this threshold and are thus deemed to be nuclear capable. The other five, all within the Fateh-110 family of missiles, are certainly lethal, especially when shipped to Hizbullah for use against Israel, but they are clearly not intended for nuclear use. Because capability does not equal intent, the MTCR guidelines should be just the first step in an assessment of Iran’s intentions for its missiles. When the United Nations Security Council drafted a new resolution in July 2015 to accompany the Iran nuclear agreement finalised that month, an element of intent was added to previous sanctions resolution language that prohibited launches of Iranian missiles that were ‘capable of delivering nuclear weapons’. The 2015 resolution calls upon Iran not to engage in activity concerning missiles ‘designed to be’ capable of delivering nuclear weapons. What it means ‘to be designed’ is undefined. Judging intent is partly subjective, but technical clues and intelligence information can guide analysis. The soundest approach is to disaggregate Iran’s various missile systems, and to assess design intentions on the basis of the technical capabilities and lineage of the different missiles.
Topic:: Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: United States, Europe, Iran, Middle East, Israel, and North America

Search

Search Constraints

Search Results

Refine your search

Topic

Political Geography

Content Type

Publishing Institution

Author

Publication Year

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS