Political Geography: Iran / Topic: Security

1. The Israeli ThreatL What is driving the renewed escalation between Iran and Azerbaijan?

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 05-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: The Ministry of Interior, Security Agency, and Prosecutor General’s Office of Azerbaijan announced in a joint statement on Tuesday, May 16, 2023, that nine individuals were arrested on charges of planning to overthrow the government by force, assassinate prominent figures and senior Azerbaijani officials. The statement indicated that they had connections to Iranian intelligence agencies, and that the cell was composed of a person named Ruhollah Akhoundzadeh and his son Mursal, along with seven others working under his supervision. On his part, the spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nasser Kanaani, rejected the accusations in a statement on May 18, denying any official or unofficial relationship between these individuals and Iran. He affirmed that imprisoning individuals on the pretext of their connection to Iran is unacceptable.
Topic:: International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, and Escalation
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Azerbaijan

2. Facing Pressure: Iran executes former Defence Minister

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 02-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: Iran executed on January 14, 2022, a British-Iranian national who once served as its deputy defence minister, defying calls from London and Washington for his release. Alireza Akbari was arrested in 2019 and accused of spying for Britain. He served as a defence minister between 2000 and 2005 under former President Mohammad Khatami, and he fought during the Iraq-Iran war. He also served in other high-ranking positions in the navy and the ministry of defence’s research centre, and was appointed as the general secretariat of the national security council.
Topic:: Security, Elites, and Capital Punishment
Political Geography:: United Kingdom, Iran, and Middle East

3. Protests in Iran in comparative perspective: A revolutionary state in trouble

Author:: Erwin van Veen and Hamidreza Azizi
Publication Date:: 03-2023
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:: Successive protests in 2009, 2019 and 2022 have poignantly laid bare the much reduced social and political legitimacy of Iran’s ruling elites. Reform-from-within is no longer viewed as credible. Even former pro-reform leaders like Mousavi have abandoned hope and call for regime change. While further protests are inevitable, it is nevertheless unlikely that they will produce a revolution that overthrows the regime in the short-term, as long as their national organisation and leadership remain weak, Iran’s ruling elites cohesive, security forces loyal, and the administration continues to function. The country has witnessed hundreds of protests every year for the past few years, in addition to those of 2009, 2019 and 2022, but calls for fundamental change continue to go unheeded. The hope of the ruling elite is that the mix of repression and Iran’s dire economic situation will prevent protests from recurring. At best, quasi-reforms will provide some band-aids. In both scenarios, the Islamic Republic of Iran is no more in the sense that it lacks legitimacy among large segments of the population. It has also shed the elements of republican governance it used to have. And yet it lives on because it remains a capable state with a fairly cohesive ruling elite and ample coercive power. Iran is on course to become a classic one-party authoritarian regime, which may shed some of its religious orientations once its Supreme Leader leaves office for reasons of age. It remains to be seen how sustainable this will be given the crescendo of protests.
Topic:: Security, Economy, Domestic Politics, Protests, and Civil Unrest
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

4. What Losing the Iran Deal Could Mean for the Region

Author:: Seyed Hossein Mousavian
Publication Date:: 01-2023
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:: School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:: If President Joe Biden is seeking to restore sustainable peace and security in the region, he has to start with reviving the JCPOA
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Peace, JCPOA, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

5. The Foreign Policy of Post-Revolutionary Iran: Expediency at the Crossroad of Suprra-Nationalism and Soverignty

Author:: Hamoon Khelghat-Doost
Publication Date:: 03-2023
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
Institution:: Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Abstract:: The direction of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s foreign policy has been a source of argument among scholars since the establishment of the revolutionary regime in 1979. Iran’s foreign policy just like its revolution is still a mystery to many researchers as it is difficult to find an appropriate theoretical framework for it. Revolution and how revolutionary states such as China and Cuba view the world and build their foreign relations with other nations have been long discussed in the works of prominent scholars including Leng (1972), Armstrong (1993), Walt (1996), Halliday (2002), and Doma-Nguez & Domínguez (2009). However, what makes the foreign policy of revolutionary Iran different from other revolutionary states (mostly Marxist revolutions) and, therefore, more confusing to study, is the Shi’a Islamic nature of it.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

6. NATO’s Black Sea Frontier Is the Southern Shore of the Caspian Sea

Author:: Luke Coffey
Publication Date:: 03-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Hudson Institute
Abstract:: Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has led to a renewed focus on the geopolitical importance of the Black Sea. What the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has overlooked is Russia’s use—often in coordination with Iran—of the Caspian Sea to advance its war aims in Ukraine. The Caspian Sea offers Russia a strategic depth to strike targets far afield in a relatively safe manner, is currently the only way for Russia to reinforce its Black Sea Fleet, and serves as a transport conduit allowing Iran to deliver military assistance to Russia for use against Ukraine. As Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the United Kingdom’s chief of the defence staff, recently said, “The flow of Iranian weapons to Russia’s war in Ukraine demonstrates that there is no easy geographical distinction on matters of defense.”1 In the context of regional security, military planners in the United States and NATO should see the most extreme point of the alliance’s Black Sea frontier as the southern shoreline of the Caspian Sea.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Alliance, and Strategy
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Caspian Sea, and Black Sea

7. The Muqawama and Its Enemies: Shifting Patterns in Iran-Backed Shiite Militia Activity in Iraq

Author:: Luca Nevola and Miran Feyli
Publication Date:: 05-2023
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED)
Abstract:: The post-2003 security landscape in Iraq has seen the proliferation of dozens of militias identifying with Shiite Islam. Many of these actors are integrated into the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) – a paramilitary group established in 2014 to counter the Islamic State and later incorporated into the Iraqi state forces – and have strong relations with the Iranian regime and its security apparatus.1 These Iran-backed groups include prominent militias such as Kataib Hizbullah (KH), Asaib Ahl al-Haqq (AAH), and Haraka Hizbullah al-Nujaba (HHN), as well as a number of recently formed ‘facade groups’ like Ashab al-Kahf and Qasim al-Jabarin. Such facade groups are generally assumed to operate on behalf of KH, AAH, and HHN (see graph below). These groups are notable for portraying themselves as the Muqawama, or the ‘resistance’ against the United States and other foreign forces.
Topic:: Security, Non State Actors, Armed Forces, and Militias
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

8. An Heir and a Spare? How Yemen’s “Southern Hezbollah” Could Change Iran’s Deterrent Calculus

Author:: Michael Knights
Publication Date:: 12-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Since October 27, the Houthis have launched three medium-range ballistic missiles at Israel, a first since Saddam Hussein fired Scud missiles into the country in 1991. The Yemen-based jihadists have also launched at least eight salvos of cruise missiles and long-range explosive drones focused on the southern port of Eilat. Moreover, they have attacked U.S. assets directly during the Hamas-Israel war, shooting down one MQ-9 Reaper drone and routing numerous missiles near Navy vessels. If Iran continues to develop the group’s capabilities, the Houthis may provide the broader “axis of resistance” with a potent new chess piece. In this timely Policy Note, Michael Knights assesses the rising Houthi threat and explains how the United States and its allies can respond more assertively and effectively. A revamped policy would recognize the intimate alliance between the Houthis and Iran—which has never been a “marriage of convenience,” as some analysts have imagined—and seek to counter the group’s aggression with the goal of securing U.S. interests and providing a better future for the Yemeni people.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Deterrence, and Houthis
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

9. The Next Generation of Iranian Ballistic Missiles: Technical Advances, Strategic Objectives, and Potential Western Responses

Author:: Farzin Nadimi
Publication Date:: 07-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: On May 25, 2023, Iran’s minister of defense, Gen. Mohammad Reza Qaraei Ashtiani, unveiled the so-called fourth generation of the Khoramshahr liquid-fuel ballistic missile—aka Kheibar—amid heightened tensions with Israel and the West regarding Tehran’s nuclear program and renewed talk of preventive strikes against Iran’s key nuclear sites. Ashtiani spoke at the Hakimiyeh Aerospace Industries Organization complex, east of Tehran, against a backdrop with the new missile and a large model of Jerusalem’s Dome of the Rock. The name Kheibar comes from a fortified oasis settlement north of Medina, Saudi Arabia, inhabited by Jewish tribes before the Islamic era. In AD 628, the Jews there were defeated by Muslim armies led by Ali ibn Abi Talib, who has become a legendary figure in Shia Islam. The message to Israel implicit in the Kheibar announcement was therefore unmistakable. The Khoramshahr is Iran’s most advanced liquid-fuel ballistic missile and probably the first using storable liquid fuel, with its first version having been introduced at a military parade on September 22, 2017. The missile is believed to have much in common technically with the North Korean Hwasong-10—itself based on the retired Russian R-27 submarine-launched ballistic missile. Iran is thought to have received several Hwasong-10 missiles from North Korea in 2005 for reverse engineering purposes. The Khoramshahr is also Iran’s first departure from the Russian Scud and scaled Scud-generation propulsion systems.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Affairs, and Deterrence
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

10. The Regent of Allah: Ali Khamenei's Political Evolution in Iran

Author:: Mehdi Khalaji
Publication Date:: 07-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: During his lengthy tenure as Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei has shown a knack for consolidating power by creating layers of bureaucracy in military, economic, and religious affairs. In turn, he has liberally purged officials who have hinted at disloyalty to him, the Islamic Republic, or its governing doctrine, velayat-e faqih (rule of the jurisprudent). But Khamenei does not lack for personal complexity. As a younger man, he dressed casually, flaunted his love of literature, and composed poetry. And as a leader, he has often demonstrated flexibility—coined as “heroic flexibility” in the case of the 2015 nuclear deal—at times of national risk or strained social cohesion. He has likewise blessed the rise of relatively moderate presidents such as Mohammad Khatami and Hassan Rouhani when he thought their leadership would reinforce national stability. In this wide-ranging study, former Qom theologian Mehdi Khalaji details Khamenei’s political ascent, from his role as an influential cleric in Mashhad to his presidency under Ruhollah Khomeini and his surprising appointment as Supreme Leader. Whoever succeeds him, the author makes plain, will inherit an infrastructure designed to preserve Iran’s authoritarian system and suppress rumblings of internal dissent.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Political Islam, and Ali Khamenei
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

11. Arming the Revolution: Trends in Iranian Defense Spending, 2013–23

Author:: Henry Rome
Publication Date:: 06-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: The Islamic Republic boasts a large and expanding nuclear program, the most capable missile and drone force in the Middle East, and a broad network of proxies that threaten U.S. interests. Nevertheless, scholars have devoted little attention to a key area: Iran’s defense spending. Although the data is publicly available, tabulating it is more difficult than one might assume, and three particular hazards await: (1) conversion of Iranian rials to dollars at unrealistic rates, (2) reliance on spending plans as opposed to actual spending, and (3) undercounting. Thus, any attempt to understand Iran’s military spending must scrupulously avoid such traps. In this Policy Note, Iran expert Henry Rome offers the most detailed public accounting yet of Tehran’s recent defense spending, illustrated by charts showing domestic trends and comparisons with regional rivals. The findings show how spending surged following the 2015 nuclear deal and plummeted following the U.S. withdrawal from the deal in 2018. They also suggest that a new nuclear accord with Washington will likely prompt another increase, demanding a broader strategy to counter Iran’s military ambitions alongside its nuclear ones.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Economy, Defense Spending, and Military
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

12. Striking Back: Iran and the Rise of Asymmetric Drone Warfare in the Middle East

Author:: Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr.
Publication Date:: 02-2023
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Iranian drone strikes, as exemplified by the September 2019 attack against Saudi Aramco facilities, have jolted Middle East leaders and revealed Tehran’s long-range precision strike capabilities. The regime’s large and growing drone force, which can be used for reconnaissance or strike missions, now poses an existential threat to the Gulf states and a direct threat to Israel, as does its formidable missile force. Moreover, Iranian drones transferred to Russia have had a significant impact on Moscow’s war against Ukraine. In the bigger picture, advances in drone technology have produced an inflection point in aerial warfare—comparable to the introduction of manned flight more than a century ago—that has ended the guarantee of U.S. air superiority over its forces and bases. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. explores the contours and consequences of Iran’s drone activities in this timely Policy Note. To counter the Islamic Republic, the former CENTCOM commander recommends an approach centered on clearer U.S. communication about its goals for the region, tighter collaboration with partners and allies, and enhanced efforts to counter Iran’s drone fleet, along with its ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Drones, Military, and Asymmetric Warfare
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

13. Iran’s Misunderstood Nuclear Law

Author:: Henry Rome
Publication Date:: 09-2023
Content Type:: Commentary and Analysis
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: This summer, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei delivered his most detailed remarks in years on Iran’s nuclear trajectory. While his comments on a potential agreement with the West drew the most attention, he also called on Iranian officials to follow a controversial 2020 law that ordered rapid steps to escalate the nuclear program and reduce international monitoring. “Some people think that this law creates problems for the country,” he stated. “They are wrong. This law is a good law...And it must be followed.” Indeed, the 2020 legislation has played a prominent role in Iranian debates about nuclear advances, and Khamenei’s comments suggest this will remain the case. Yet the law is widely misunderstood; more important, it has not been the primary driver of Iran’s actual nuclear activity over the past three years. The governments of Hassan Rouhani and Ebrahim Raisi each sidestepped key provisions of the legislation while also escalating the program in ways the law does not require. Despite Khamenei’s sentiment, neither the existing law nor potential successor legislation is likely to compel escalation or constrain diplomacy.
Topic:: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Legislation, Nuclear Energy, and Military
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

14. The Unfulfilled Promise of EU Foreign and Security Policy towards Iran

Author:: Riccardo Alcaro, Steven Blockmans, Akin Unver, and Sine Özkaraşahin
Publication Date:: 02-2023
Content Type:: Research Paper
Institution:: Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:: With the 2015 nuclear deal dead in all but name, Iran is getting closer to Russia and more repressive at home, while EU member states’ priorities about the Islamic Republic now extend beyond nuclear proliferation to human rights and European security. This shift in priorities cements a re-orientation of the EU’s approach to Iran from conditional engagement to confrontation. EU member states’ options are limited, however. Pressure worked prior to the nuclear agreement because the EU cut off significant trade with Iran. But US extraterritorial sanctions, re-imposed after the United States left the deal in 2018, have rendered EU-Iran trade so modest that cutting it would have little impact. The EU could get more leverage by providing incentives, yet the political inexpediency of rewarding Iran at a time of rising belligerence of the Islamic Republic greatly restricts the range of benefits potentially on offer. Still, in the mid- to longer term, the EU and its member states will need to combine pressure with some form of incentives if they want to defend their interests in non-proliferation, European security and the protection of human rights in Iran. They also need to resort to a variety of international partnerships in order to maximise their residual leverage.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, and Middle East

15. The Abraham Accords - Israel and the Middle East - What Next?

Author:: Eyal Zisser
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:: Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:: The signing of the Abraham Accords in September 2020 was a turning point in Israel’s standing in the Middle East. The accords created a positive atmosphere that helped promote regional cooperation in security and the economy. This positive change does not, however, provide an answer to some of the fundamental challenges that Israel is facing, which cast their shadows on the entire region, such as the Iranian threat - Tehran’s regional ambitions and its efforts to gain nuclear capabilities; but first and foremost, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is getting further and further away from a solution, and may flare up and damage regional stability and hinder the progress in Israeli-Arab relations, which was achieved following the signing of the Abraham accords.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Peace, and Abraham Accords
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

16. Holding the Hard-line: What is behind Iran’s seizure of Greek ships in Arabian Gulf?

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: On May 27, Iran seized two Greek tankers, named “Prudent Warrior” and “Delta Poseidon”, in the Arabian Gulf. Forces from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) descended on the tankers and ordered them to sail to Bandar Abbas port. Onboard the tankers were 49 crew members. Greece described the operation as ‘piracy’. The seizure seems to be a reprisal for Greece’s role earlier in the month assisting the US impounding a Russian-flagged tanker transporting Iranian oil and carrying 19 crew.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Maritime, and Shipping
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Greece

17. Risk and Responsibility: Managing Future Iranian Weapons of Mass Destruction Threats

Author:: Becca Wasser and Jennie Matuschak
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Washington is reimagining its global role, leading the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to make difficult choices about priorities, resources, and risk to better address the long-term “pacing challenge” posed by China. To do so, the United States plans to accept risks in the Middle East and against future Iran threats. Iran’s possession and potential use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs)—specifically, its nuclear program, chemical weapons, and biological agents—pose the greatest threat to U.S. interests and Washington’s ability to accept risk in the region. But how Iran might leverage WMDs to threaten U.S. interests and upend Washington’s plans to make trade-offs in global responsibilities is unclear, while the risks of failing to address these challenges remain high. As a result, the DoD and its component organizations, such as the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), must enhance their understanding of the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear, chemical, and biological capabilities and the escalation dynamics surrounding Iranian WMDs during crisis and conflict. By doing so, the United States can better accept risk in the Middle East and revise its global priorities while still protecting core U.S. interests. To improve the DoD’s understanding of future Iranian WMD-related threats and escalation dynamics, the Gaming Lab at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) conducted a series of three virtual strategic-operational tabletop exercises (TTXs) exploring future Iranian nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons use. The TTXs indicated that even if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, the likelihood the regime will use it is low. Instead, the regime may be more likely to use chemical and biological weapons to escalate conflict. Moreover, there are significant asymmetries between American and Iranian views of conflict timelines, escalation redlines, and risk tolerance, all of which make it difficult to offer and signal credible ways to de-escalate a crisis. Differences between Washington’s risk acceptance and that of its regional partners—Israel, in particular—further complicate U.S.-Iran interactions. The TTXs aimed to enable the United States to identify where and how it might mitigate the risk it must accept to better marshal resources in support of the department’s strategic guidance. Accepting greater risk against Iran and in the Middle East more broadly means shifting U.S. strategic priorities in the region. This shift has the potential to unsettle allies and partners, and may possibly embolden Iran in the near term, but such tough choices must be made if the United States wishes to prioritize other long-term threats that may be of greater impact to U.S. security, such as China.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Weapons, and Risk
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

18. The Iran Nuclear Deal at Six: Now or Never

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 01-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: After all is said and done, the Iran nuclear deal struck in 2015 remains the best way to achieve the West’s non-proliferation goals and the sanctions relief that Tehran seeks. The parties must not squander what is likely their last chance to save the accord.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Nuclear Power, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

19. Starr Forum: Republics of Myth: National Narratives and the US-Iran Conflict

Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Video
Institution:: MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:: Why does the rift between the US and Iran persist? A new book by CIS scholars sheds new light on this longstanding conflict.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

20. The Russian-Iran Partnership in a Multipolar World

Author:: Clément Therme
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:: The strengthening of the partnership between Russia and Iran depends on overlapping security interests; bilaterally, regionally and on the world stage. Tehran has pursued a regional policy program that is largely in line with Russia’s interests, whether these relate to Syria (from 2011), the Caucasus, Central Asia, or Afghanistan (since 1991). This security dimension was already one of the foundations of the bilateral relationship in the post-Cold War-period. It has now appeared in regional dealings between Tehran and Moscow. In addition, the decline of US international predominance, which has been apparent since the 2000s, has allowed Russia and Iran to develop a shared ideological discourse in opposition to “Western values”. Beyond this shared ideological basis, Tehran has developed a true “Realpolitik” whereby it relies on Russian foreign policy to relieve US pressure on Iran that is aimed at regime change or, at the very least, a change in the behavior of the Islamic Republic. In other words, in seeking to preserve intact the main ideological tenets of its regime, Tehran has added a new dimension to its relationship with Moscow. Since 1991, this relationship has become a matter of survival for a regime that faces both popular opposition at home and external pressure from Washington: pressure that increased during the Trump administration of 2017-2021.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, and Multipolarity
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, and Middle East

21. Prospects for Pax Caucasia? The 3+3 Regional Cooperation Initiative

Author:: Vasif Huseynov
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Baku Dialogues
Institution:: ADA University
Abstract:: The 3+3 format for regional cooperation is an initiative that was first proposed by the leaders of Turkey and Azerbaijan in the aftermath of the Second Karabakh War, building somewhat on an idea that originated in Iran during the war itself. This grouping covers the three countries of the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia) plus the three most important countries neighboring this region (Russia, Turkey, and Iran). Thus in December 2020, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced the initiative at a joint press conference with his Azerbaijani counterpart, President Ilham Aliyev, during his visit to Baku in which he reviewed the military parade marking Azerbaijan’s victory over Armenia in the aforementioned war—a war that heralded the fundamental transformation of regional geopolitical and geo‑economic realities. On this occasion, Erdoğan called 3+3 a win‑win initiative for all actors in the region. Given its obvious potential to promote peace and security in the South Caucasus and facilitate the normalization of relations between former belligerents, some local experts believe that the 3+3 initiative could be instrumental for the emergence of Pax Caucasia. Four of the six countries immediately reacted positively to the initiative, with Armenia and Georgia expressing some reservation. While Armenia initially sounded skeptical, the government of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan eventually confirmed its participation in this format. For now, the only country that retains distance from the Pax Caucasia process is Georgia which, due to its ongoing territorial dispute with Russia, refuses to participate in this platform and proposes an alternative 3+2 format (the countries of the South Caucasus + the EU and the United States). Tbilisi has called its counterproposal the “Peaceful Neighborhood Initiative” but has taken no concrete action to set it in motion. Neither Aliyev nor Pashinyan have yet to publicly comment on the 3+2 format. Others have also remained silent. Hence, the likelihood it can prevail over the 3+3 framework in geopolitical substance is low, given that it excludes major active regional players like Russia and Turkey and substitutes them with two Western actors that are evidently less engaged in the region. The advent of the present phase of the conflict over Ukraine, which began on 24 February 2022, has also not increased the prospects of the Georgian idea being adopted, either.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Caucasus, Middle East, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

22. Big brother is watching: Evolving relations between Iran and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq

Author:: Kamal Chomani
Publication Date:: 03-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:: The relationship between Iran and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) will remain securitised in the short term due to the unresolved business of a return to the nuclear deal and its possible aftermath, the gradual reduction of the US military footprint in Iraq and the strengthening hold on power of Iran’s conservatives. Iran’s response to the Iraqi Kurdish referendum for independence in 2017 and its suppression of the revival of armed activity by Iranian Kurdish parties operating from Iraq makes it clear that Tehran does not hesitate to intervene to defend its security interests either. Iran is also likely to seek to counter growing Turkish intrusiveness in northern Iraq. Because the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) is currently weak and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) stuck between Turkey, dissatisfaction with its own rule and pro-Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) sentiments among segments of Kurdish public opinion, the KRI is more vulnerable to Iranian and Turkish pressure than it used to be. In other words, dependency and dominance will continue to characterise the Iran-KRI relation to Tehran’s benefit for the foreseeable future. Ironically, deeper integration of the KRI into a federal Iraq could reduce this risk in the medium-term.
Topic:: Security, Bilateral Relations, and Political Parties
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, and Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI)

23. Sanctions Against Russia: Five Lessons from the Case of Iran

Author:: Stefan Meister and David Ramin Jalilvand
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:: Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has led to the most comprehensive economic sanctions imposed on a country of this size since the end of the Second World War. Yet sanctions are only an effective tool of foreign and security policy if they are embedded in a sustainable political strategy that considers the cost-benefit analysis for both sides. Looking at the sanctions against Iran can be helpful when it comes to learning lessons about how to deal with Russia.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Eurasia, and Ukraine

24. Difficulties in the Negotiations with Iran: Implications for Israel

Author:: Eldad Shavit and Sima Shine
Publication Date:: 09-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:: The negotiations between the United States and Iran on renewing the nuclear agreement have run into serious difficulties following the opposition by the United States and the European partners to Iran's demand that the IAEA close the open files on the Iranian nuclear program before the implementation of the agreement (120 days after signing). At the same time, Iran continues to accelerate the program, including the enrichment of uranium using cascades of advanced centrifuges. Three scenarios are possible: a resolution of the crisis and achievement of an agreement; continued stagnation, i.e., lowintensity talks; or the collapse of the negotiations. The worst scenario for Israel is a continuation of the current situation, in which Iran could in a short time accumulate enough fissile material for weapons-grade enrichment for several nuclear facilities, while the temptation of a nuclear breakout increases. Thus, Israel should immediately formulate a new strategy regarding Iran. The government should conduct a discreet dialogue with the US administration and focus on proposals that seek to advance Israel’s military and strategic needs, including consolidating covert and effective cooperation with the countries of the region under the auspices of the United States.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Negotiation, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

25. Stalemate in Talks with Iran on a Return to the Nuclear Agreement

Author:: Sima Shine and Eldad Shavit
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:: The talks in Vienna between the United States and Iran ended with the text of the agreement almost complete. Conclusion of the deal rests on political decisions in Washington and Tehran, mostly concerning the Iranian demand to remove the Revolutionary Guards from the State Department’s list of terror organizations. At this stage the chances of finalizing the deal are equal to the chances of the talks collapsing. How should Israel act at this sensitive time?
Topic:: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

26. A new climate for peace: How Europe can promote environmental cooperation between the Gulf Arab states and Iran

Author:: Cinzia Bianco
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:: The process of de-escalation between Iran and Gulf Arab states is fragile and could collapse if efforts to revive the Iran nuclear deal fail. A platform for dialogue on climate and environmental security may be one of the few politically feasible ways to strengthen and sustain diplomatic channels between Iran and Gulf monarchies. The Middle East is very exposed to climate change and faces challenges including water scarcity, air pollution and sandstorms, rising temperatures, and extreme weather events. Europeans should proactively support a regional platform to address climate issues as a means of advancing their interests in de-escalation, asserting their influence in an increasingly multipolar region, and fulfilling climate and environmental security commitments. European initiatives should highlight the merits of regional cooperation, focusing on diplomacy, joint scientific research, capacity building, and strategic investment.
Topic:: Security, Climate Change, Environment, and Cooperation
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, and Gulf Nations

27. Sanctions Run Amok – The Undermining of U.S. Power

Author:: Keith A. Preble
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Fletcher Security Review
Institution:: The Fletcher School, Tufts University
Abstract:: Well into its second year, the Biden administration has continued to grapple with persistent foreign policy challenges while new ones have emerged: North Korea has not curtailed its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs; negotiations with Iran on resuscitating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) remain stalled; and a Russian troop buildup near Ukraine may signal a potential invasion and full-scale conflict. In confronting these and other challenges, the United States continues to use economic sanctions as a mean of punishing, signaling, and coercing rivals into changing their foreign policy behaviors. As a tool of American economic power, policymakers often see sanctions as “Goldilocks” instruments that are “just right,” albeit ones that require time and patience to facilitate policy change.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Economy
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, North Korea, North America, and United States of America

28. Countering Iran's Regional Strategy: A Long-Term, Comprehensive Approach

Author:: Eyal Zamir
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: A coordinated response to Iran’s aggression can preserve U.S. and Western interests, reinforce Israel and America’s Arab allies, and promote regional stability. For decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has sought to extend its influence throughout the Middle East, and the threat has only grown more serious amid the regime’s enhanced conventional military capabilities and proximity to a nuclear breakout. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has spearheaded Tehran’s expansionist “four capitals” strategy, focused on Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sanaa. In Iraq, the IRGC works through elements of the government-funded Popular Mobilization Forces; in Syria, through the regime of Bashar al-Assad; in Lebanon, through Hezbollah—which can be regarded as Iran’s “model” proxy; and in Yemen, through the Houthis, who hold territory and oppose the internationally recognized government. In all these places, the IRGC has exploited civil wars and interstate conflicts to spread its political, economic, and military influence. In this Policy Focus, Maj. Gen. Eyal Zamir, IDF, draws on his deep experience in the Israeli military establishment to propose a detailed plan for undermining Iran’s influence in the region—an approach that will preserve U.S. and Western interests, reinforce Israel and America’s Arab allies, and promote regional stability.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Instability, and Regional Security
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

29. Iran's Nuclear Hedging Strategy: Shaping the Islamic Republic's Proliferation Calculus

Author:: Michael Eisenstadt
Publication Date:: 11-2022
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Tehran’s willingness to pause aspects of its nuclear program may offer opportunities to stoke regime concerns about the potential costs of moving forward. Since halting its crash nuclear weapons program in 2003, the Islamic Republic has pursued a cautious hedging strategy that has enabled it to become an advanced nuclear threshold state, while also avoiding a military confrontation with the United States and Israel. Yet Iran’s willingness to pause aspects of its nuclear program in order to ease pressure—and in turn to pursue more urgent objectives—may help Washington constrain Tehran’s nuclear ambitions by amplifying its concerns about the potential risks and costs of proliferating. In this Policy Focus, military analyst Michael Eisenstadt surveys the evolution of Iran’s nuclear hedging strategy and suggests ways for the United States, along with its allies and partners, to shape the regime’s proliferation calculus with the goal of preventing an Iranian breakout and a nuclearized Middle East.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Affairs, and Nonproliferation
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

30. Scoring Iraq’s New Government: Metrics for Preserving U.S. Interests

Author:: Michael Knights
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: The protracted post-election process has been a step backward for Iraqi democracy, so Washington will need to closely monitor the new leadership’s actions and hold Baghdad to measurable benchmarks. Iraq’s stalled government formation process finally lurched forward on October 17, with new president Abdul Latif Rashid taking office more than a year after the 2021 election. Incoming prime minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani will now try to ratify his cabinet during a parliamentary session on October 22. If he succeeds as expected, Baghdad will finally close perhaps its most troubled electoral cycle yet—a chapter in which a clear popular vote nearly failed to produce a peaceful transition of power, and the losing factions spurred the biggest winner to abandon parliament through corrupt judicial rulings. Under these sad circumstances, the U.S. government and its partners need to quietly but insistently push for early, inclusive elections to restore legitimacy to the democratic process. Simultaneously, all of Iraq’s friends must watch the new government like a hawk to ensure that militias and corrupt politicians do not attempt to purge technocrats, conduct witch hunts against Western-leaning officials, cover up past graft, or initiate a new wave of “asset-stripping” via state institutions. After many false alarms, the survival of Iraq’s close relationship with the West is truly at stake right now, and only firm expectation-setting can ensure that the partnership continues.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Government, Terrorism, Reform, Democracy, and Military
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

31. Snapback Sanctions on Iran: More Bark Than Bite?

Author:: Henry Rome and Louis Dugit-Gros
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Threatening to reimpose old UN sanctions would likely have little practical effect on Tehran’s ability to trade oil and export drones, while the plethora of other potential complications suggest that it should be treated as a tool of last resort. In recent weeks, the United States, Britain, France, and Germany have argued that Iran’s sale of drones to Russia for use against Ukraine violates UN Security Council Resolution 2231, the backbone of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). These allegations, combined with ongoing diplomatic deadlock over reviving that 2015 nuclear agreement, have led some to suggest pursuing “snapback,” a provision that would reimpose terminated UN resolutions on Iran and essentially scrub the JCPOA from the books. How would snapback work, and what political, economic, and security consequences would it have?
Topic:: Security, Economics, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, Sanctions, Nonproliferation, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

32. A Stabilizing Factor: Oman’s Quiet Influence amid Mounting Uncertainty in the Gulf

Author:: Jeonardo Jacopo Maria Mazzucco
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Based on its sound reputation as a conflict mediator and talks facilitator, Oman is well-positioned to tone down flaring rivalries in the Gulf and prevent tensions from spiraling out of control. After a timid thawing of tensions, the Gulf region is witnessing a renewed phase of uncertainty. Despite being a skillful master at navigating turbulent waters, Oman is eyeing the revamping of tensions in its immediate neighborhood with growing apprehension. The failed attempts to review the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the revamping of Iran’s outward-looking incendiary rhetoric as well as localized military retaliations amid recent mass protests, and the failure to extend the U.N.-brokered ceasefire in Yemen do not bode well for the region’s precarious stability. Muscat has a vested interest in preventing at-sea incidents from escalating and harsh infighting among rival Yemeni factions from reaching alarming proportions, especially given its coasts looking out on the Strait of Hormuz and much of its southwestern frontier bordering Yemen.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Energy Policy, and Political stability
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Oman, and Gulf Nations

33. Linking Foreign Policy and Energy Security: Iran-Pakistan gas Pipeline

Author:: Bibi Saira and Aisha Javed
Publication Date:: 12-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Journal of Political Studies
Institution:: Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:: Energy in the context of foreign policy has become a major political concern for the stability of the country. Pakistan’s energy and foreign policy experts paid less attention to strengthening its relationship on the basis of energy with the energyrich countries. Despite its geographical significance as a potential energy corridor between the Middle East and Central Asia, Pakistan’s energy sector fails to secure its energy needs. This research study focuses on energy dynamics in the foreign policy of Pakistan and regional energy projects like the IP gas Pipeline, have been studied in detail. The study found that Pakistan is left with no other option but to execute regional energy projects if the country needs to overcome the energy crisis. The study also found that the major obstacles to executing these projects in Pakistan are a lack of financial resources, lack of investments, international pressure, the country’s internal issues, regional issues and the changing regional situation. This study is proposed to be useful for policymakers to evaluate the impact of energy import dependency and to formulate foreign policy.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Pipeline, Energy Crisis, and Energy
Political Geography:: Pakistan, Iran, South Asia, and Middle East

34. Ontological Security and Iran’s Missile Program

Author:: Ali Bagheri Dolatabadi
Publication Date:: 07-2022
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:: Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:: This article attempts to answer the question of why Iran is reluctant to discuss its missile program. Unlike other studies that focus on the importance of Iran’s missile program in providing deterrence for the country and establishing a balance of military power in the region, or that view the missile program as one of dozens of post-revolutionary contentious issues between Iran and the United States, this article looks into Iran’s ontological security. The paper primarily argues that the missile program has become a source of pride for Iranians, inextricably linked to their identity. As a result, the Iranian authorities face two challenges when it comes to sitting at the negotiation table with their Western counterparts: deep mistrust of the West, and the ensuing sense of shame over any deal on the missile issue. Thus, Iranian officials opted to preserve the identity components of the program, return to normal and daily routines of life, insist on the missile program’s continuation despite sanctions and threats, and emphasize the dignity and honor of having a missile program. The article empirically demonstrates how states can overcome feelings of shame and mistrust. It also theoretically proves that when physical security conflicts with ontological security, governments prefer the former over the latter, based on the history of Iran’s nuclear negotiations. They appeal to create new narratives to justify changing their previous policies.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Weapons, Negotiation, and Identity
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

35. Vienna: A return to Ben-Gurion’s WW2 Dual Strategy?

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 04-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: It is time to revive the spirit of Ben-Gurion’s famous dictum from the days of WWII regarding the stance toward the British: “We will fight the war as if there were no White Paper, and we will fight the White Paper as if there were no war.” This makes sense concerning Israel’s dilemma towards the US in the context of the renewal of the JCPOA.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

36. The Meeting Between Assad and Khameini: What was on the Table?

Author:: Marta Furlan
Publication Date:: 05-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad might have decided to cement his friendship with Tehran, fearing that Moscow’s capacity to invest in Syria’s reconstruction would be negatively affected. Assad may also try to play Iran against its Gulf rivals to draw resources from both.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and Peace
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Syria

37. Latest Killings in Iran May Indicate a Notable Shift in Israeli Strategy

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 06-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: A notable change of the rules of engagement has taken place, in which the totality of Iranian actions will now be opposed, also on Iranian soil. The strike on the UAV fleet at Kermanshah and the assassination of Colonel Khodai in Tehran were the first manifestations of this new approach.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

38. Israel Caves to Bad Maritime Deal

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 10-2022
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: We should not forget that moderate Arab states are watching Israeli behavior, especially in the Gulf. Without determined and effective action, Israel’s allies in the region, wary of American withdrawal and fearful of Iran, will be reluctant to rely on Israel and could later move closer to Tehran.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

39. India and Iran Relations under the Shadow of Global Politics: A Brief Historical Overview

Author:: Mukhtar Ahmad Bhat
Publication Date:: 10-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Novus Orbis: Journal of Politics & International Relations
Institution:: Department of International Relations, Karadeniz Technical University
Abstract:: In contemporary world politics, India and Iran occupy great strategic significance. Both countries have huge convergence of national interests. Collaboration and cooperation between the countries would resolve their respective domestic issues and challenges and play a determining role in strengthening their role in global affairs. For a fast-growing economy and energy deficit country like India, Iran provides access to a huge amount of natural resources and opens up its vast untapped market for Indian finished goods and services. In addition to that, Iran, due to its geographic location can act as a transit route for India to reach strategically important countries in Central Asia and Afghanistan. Being the second-largest Shia populated country in the world after Iran and one of the highest energy importing countries, India occupies an important place in the strategic thinking of Iran. In the past, India was the second-largest oil-exporting destination for Iran and an important trading partner for Iran. Taking the structural realism as a theoretical framework, the article attempts to seek an answer to the questions, why despite belonging to a single-family, living together for many centuries and sharing common social, religious and traditional values, the two countries have been unable to transform their mutual understanding into a long term strategic partnership, and how the global events have affected their mutual understanding and replaced it with trust deficit.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, India, and Asia

40. Iran talks are likely going nowhere

Author:: Alexander Grinberg
Publication Date:: 12-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Iran uses uranium enrichment as leverage on the EU and US to get concessions.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Conflict, Uranium, and Nuclear Energy
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

41. The Nuclear Talks in Vienna: Biden’s Legacy at Stake

Author:: Eytan Gilboa
Publication Date:: 11-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: From Tehran’s perspective, the goals are lifting the sanctions and securing immunity from military attacks.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Leadership
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

42. Israel Must Actively Oppose US Return to the JCPOA

Author:: Efraim Inbar and Omer Dostri
Publication Date:: 10-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: Even if Israel’s ability to influence US decision-making is limited, it is a serious mistake to downplay Israel’s opposition to the dangerous nuclear accord.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

43. What does the Deraa surrender mean for Iran and Russia in Syria?

Author:: Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: In the southwest, the outside powers of relevance are Iran and Russia. The arrangement in place from July 2018 until now was the product of an uneasy standoff between them.
Topic:: Security, Military Strategy, Conflict, Peace, and Ceasefire
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Syria

44. The Road to Natanz Runs Through Beirut

Author:: Efraim Inbar
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: One of the issues that must be dealt with before the Iranian nuclear program is removing the threat of Hezbollah missiles.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

45. Ramifications of an American Return to the 2015 Nuclear Agreement

Author:: Efraim Inbar and Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 04-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: By ignoring Israel’s views on an issue critical to its security, Washington will cast a dark shadow over Israel’s status as a key American ally in the Middle East.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Conflict, and JCPOA
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, North America, and United States of America

46. Strategic Implications of the Damage at the Natanz Enrichment Facility

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 04-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The US should be appreciative of any significant delay in Iran’s breakout timetable towards a nuclear weapon. The time gained can and should be used to negotiate a “longer, stronger” agreement.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

47. The Battle for Marib: A Tipping Point of the Civil War in Yemen?

Author:: Uzi Rubin
Publication Date:: 04-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The West is focusing on the tragic humanitarian costs of the war in Yemen while turning a blind eye to the significant strategic implications of a Houthi/Iranian victory. This approach imperils Middle Eastern and Western security.
Topic:: Security, Civil War, Conflict, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Yemen

48. The Concept of “Forward Defence”: How Has the Syrian Crisis Shaped the Evolution of Iran’s Military Strategy?

Author:: Hamidreza Azizi
Publication Date:: 02-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:: Over the past decade, Iranian officials have repeatedly referred to “forward defence” or “offensive defence” as the foundation of Iran’s military strategy. While the concept implies the inclusion of offensive aspects into Iran’s military strategy, which used to have an overwhelmingly defensive nature, it is also increasingly used to justify Iran’s military presence beyond its borders. This paper begins with a historical overview of the evolution of Iran’s military strategy, especially since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, showing how the concept of “deterrence” has become the cornerstone of its strategic military planning. It also discusses the crucial concept of “strategic depth”. Understanding these basic concepts is essential to be able to analyse the forward defence strategy, its main elements, and the domestic, regional, and international factors contributing to its formation. The paper also explores how the Syrian crisis has affected Iran’s military strategy in both conceptual and instrumental terms, leading to the formation and consolidation of the forward defence. Conceptually, Iran has justified its direct military presence far from its borders as necessary for confronting threats at their source before they reach Iranian territory. From an instrumental point of view, Iran’s involvement in the Syrian crisis has led to the development of Iran’s regional network of non-state allies and proxies, while adding a new layer to Iran’s deterrence vis-à-vis Israel. The main argument is that forward defence is not a new military doctrine but an evolved and updated form of “deterrence”. The paper also identifies Iran’s ballistic missile and drone programmes, its support for non-state actors across the region, and its focus on developing cyberwar capabilities as the main elements of its forward defence strategy, rooted in its perception that it is located in an increasingly insecure regional environment. Finally, the paper suggests that, for the United States to reach an agreement with Iran on these missile and regional issues, Washington and its regional allies must make reciprocal concessions to alleviate Iran’s sense of threat to its security and survival. In this case, Iran might be ready to make concessions on its allied and proxy militias in Yemen and Syria, although the more complex security and political situations in Iraq and Lebanon leave Tehran with comparably less leverage. While Iran is not expected to agree on considerably limiting its missile programme, an agreement on the range of its ballistic missiles could be achievable.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Missile Defense, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

49. Iran: The Riddle of Raisi

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 08-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: Iran has a new president, consolidating the hardliners’ control over the centres of power. What will he do about the country’s numerous crises? One answer is clear: the 2015 nuclear deal’s fate remains the most pressing issue for Tehran and its foreign interlocutors.
Topic:: Security, Governance, Leadership, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

50. Iranian Public Opinion At the Start of the Raisi Administration

Author:: Nancy Gallagher, Clay Ramsay, and Ebrahim Mohseni
Publication Date:: 10-2021
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 a survey fielded in late August and early September, shortly after Ebrahim Raisi was inaugurated as Iran’s new president on August 5, 2021. It provides insights into Iranian public attitudes regarding a wide range of foreign and domestic policy issues as Raisi takes office, eight months after we released a similar survey of Iranian attitudes in the early days of American president Joe Biden’s first term in office. Much has changed, and much has stayed the same since February 2021. Biden had campaigned on a pledge to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and lift sanctions imposed by the Trump administration, as a first step toward further negotiations, so Iranians were relatively positive in February about the prospects for reviving the nuclear deal and improving U.S.-Iranian relations. It took about ten weeks for the new administration to begin indirect negotiations with Iran on a mutual return to full compliance with the JCPOA. The Iranian parliament had responded to Trump’s maximum pressure campaign by passing a law specifying that if the Biden administration did not reverse that policy within weeks of taking office, Iran would exceed JCPOA-mandated limits on its nuclear program in more consequential ways and suspend special International Atomic Energy Agency access to Iran’s nuclear sites that were called for by the JCPOA. The economic, political, and public health crises confronting the new Biden administration precluded it from moving that quickly. The Iranian government promised to r The talks in Vienna made slow, but significant progress as preparations for Iran’s presidential election intensified. Members of the negotiating teams indicated that agreement had been reached by mid-June on some key issues, including the sequence of steps that Iran would take to resume fulfilling its JCPOA commitments and the corresponding sanctions relief it would get from the United States. Some important points of disagreement still needed to be resolved, though. Iran wanted reliable assurances that the United States would not withdraw again or take other steps to preclude Iran from receiving the promised benefits if it abided fully by its JCPOA obligations through October 2025, when the JCPOA specifies that many of Iran’s special nuclear commitments would end and it would have the same rights and responsibilities as other non- nuclear weapon states party to the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The United States also wanted assurance from Iran that once the JCPOA had been restored, it would start follow-on negotiations to address additional U.S. concerns.
Topic:: Security, Economics, Military Strategy, Public Opinion, and Nuclear Energy
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

51. The Iran Nuclear Deal: A Springboard for a New Middle East Security Architecture

Author:: Nabil Fahmy
Publication Date:: 02-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:: School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:: The Iran nuclear deal could be the first building block in a new Middle East security architecture.
Topic:: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

52. Solving the Nuclear Stalemate between Iran and the United States

Author:: Gawdat Bahgat
Publication Date:: 05-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:: School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:: To reach an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and provide an effective security apparatus across the region, all Middle Eastern countries need to move beyond a zero-sum mentality.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Regionalism
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

53. Iran and the GCC: Prospects for a Grand Reconciliation

Author:: Sharmine Narwani
Publication Date:: 05-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:: School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:: To realize shared priorities and fulfill the Persian Gulf’s potential as a global cornerstone for energy and trade, hardline Gulf states must acquiesce to waning U.S. hegemony and pursue reconciliation with Iran.
Topic:: Security, Energy Policy, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Hegemony, and Reconciliation
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

54. Strategic Report

Author:: Zaid Eyadat and Moh'd Khair Eiedat
Publication Date:: 05-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
Abstract:: This is not a historical nor chronological report. It is rather “a working paper”. The purpose of this rather brief report is to reflect on three major issues: first, what are the characteristics of the world we live in? How stable and predictable is it? Are those in power know what are they doing? Or is it the blind leading the blind? Is our sense of uncertainty and thus unpredictability a product of mental crisis related to one in a lifetime pandemic experience? or is it more structural with long historical span? The second question is how dangerous and out of control is the Middle east region? Or is it? The Abraham Accords promise a new dawn for the region? Paradise is just around the corner or the calm preceding the storm? The third question, where does Jordan fit in these wider circles of activities both global and regional? Deliberately we left out of the report any serious considerations of the economic aspect challenge facing Jordan which is both self-evident and widely recognized. Moreover, the emphasis is on the geostrategic aspects of security related to the global level, the regional level and that of Jordan. Let us first look at the world.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Power, Geopolitics, and Strategic Planning
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Jordan

55. "The New Levant": Rationales, implications and future trajectories of the cooperation between Jordan, Iraq and Egypt

Author:: Neil Quilliam, Zaid Eyadat, Harith Hasan, Abdelmonem Said Aly, Riham Bahi, Noor Alshyab, Amer Al Sabaileh, Johannes Uhl, and Adnan Tabatabai
Publication Date:: 12-2021
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
Abstract:: In cooperation with Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS), the Center for Strategic Studies (CSS) at the University of Jordan held a 2-day closed workshop, in Amman, with regional and international experts on the topic of the tripartite alliance between Jordan, Iraq and Egypt, discussing the nature and timing of the alliance, the national perspectives of each signatory state, policy areas of cooperation and implications for other regional actors. This introductory summary presents some of the ideas discussed during the workshop, but does not necessarily reflect the opinion or assessment of each participant or the hosting institutions.
Topic:: International Relations, Security, Energy Policy, Regional Cooperation, Partnerships, Alliance, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Egypt, and Jordan

56. Indo-Iran Relations in the Changing Regional Environment Implications for South Asia

Author:: Shehzada Afzal and Nazir Hussain
Publication Date:: 01-2021
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: South Asian Studies
Institution:: Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:: International relations are determined by systemic and structural factors at the global, regional and state/domestic levels. Inter-state relations require common interests, shared goals, inter-related threat perception and eminent security challenges. Indo-Iranian relations have been on a progressive trajectory since the beginning of current century; their relations are focussed on political, economic, security and strategic spheres. As an emerging major power, India intends to enhance its influence across regions. This paper attempts to examine how Indo-Iranian relations have shaped up over the years. How convergence of interests by these two far-off neighbors have developed to join and cooperate in economic, political and social domains. For Pakistan, any development on its eastern and western borders holds important bearing on its national security; therefore, what new challenges are posed by Indo-Iranian relations in the changing regional environment of South Asia.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Peace, and Regionalism
Political Geography:: Iran, South Asia, Indonesia, Middle East, and Asia

57. Limited Repercussions: Implications of the Emergence of Afghan-US Armored Vehicles in Tehran

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: On Wednesday, September 1, Afghan media published pictures of a number of US Humvee tanks and military vehicles affiliated with the Afghan government, transported by an Iranian army truck from Afghanistan to Iran. This came in conjunction with the publication of pictures of US-made armored vehicles in Iran on another Afghan Telegram channel. The vehicles were in the possession of the dissolved Afghan government.
Topic:: Security, Military Affairs, Media, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iran, South Asia, and United States of America

58. Mutual Concessions: Did al-Kadhimi’s visit to Tehran achieve its objectives?

Author:: FARAS
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:: On September 12, 2021, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, led a high-profile government delegation on an official one-day visit to Tehran that came upon invitation from Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi. Besides Raisi, al-Kadhimi also met Ali Shamkhani, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, and other senior officials.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Domestic Politics, and Energy
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, and Middle East

59. Religious Aspects of the Iran-Azerbaijan Conflict: Is There a Danger of a New Hybrid War?

Author:: Aleksandre Kvakhadze
Publication Date:: 11-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: Relations between Iran and Azerbaijan have become unprecedentedly strained over the past month. Iranian military forces are mobilizing across the Iran-Azerbaijan border. At the same time, a new Turkish military contingent was deployed in Azerbaijan and joint military exercises were held in the territory of the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic.1 Officials from both countries were engaged in an unfriendly rhetoric. It is unlikely that this tension between Iran and the Turkey-Azerbaijan military alliance will escalate into an open, large-scale military confrontation, but, nevertheless, there is the opinion that the Iranian state will continue hybrid warfare in Azerbaijan through the support of political and religious groups in the medium and long term based on the examples of other countries.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Religion, Alliance, and Hybrid Warfare
Political Geography:: Iran and Azerbaijan

60. The Interests of Turkey and Iran in Afghanistan: Threats and Challenges

Author:: Zurab Batiashvili
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: In the summer of 2021, as the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan, the balance of power in the country changed rapidly, and by August 15, the Taliban was able to capture the capital, Kabul, almost without a fight. On September 7, the Taliban formed a new "government" steered by Sharia Law. The Taliban also renamed the country, and, according to them, Afghanistan is now called the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan." There are no women or members of the Shiite minority in the new government. Of the 33 members of the still-incomplete government, only three belong to ethnic minorities.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Taliban, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Afghanistan, Iran, and Turkey

61. Iranian Illicit Procurement Scheme to Acquire Controlled Spectrometry Systems Busted

Author:: Spencer Faragasso and Sarah Burkhard
Publication Date:: 09-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Institute for Security and International Studies (ISIS)
Abstract:: On September 9, 2021, the German Federal Prosecutors Office issued an arrest warrant for a German-Iranian citizen, Alexander J., who is accused of illegally exporting a multitude of laboratory equipment, including four spectrometers, in three separate cases, exports that appear to have also violated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).1 The total value of all the goods exported to Iran is 1.1 million euros. The defendant, Alexander J., is accused of violating the Foreign Trade Act (AWG) and Regulation (EU) No. 267/2012 of March 23, 2012, as amended in October 2015 in response to the establishment of a special Iranian procurement channel in the JCPOA, which places restrictive measures on certain Iranian entities and equipment for export (and related activities, such as brokering). In the first two cases, Alexander J. is alleged to have exported items to an Iranian national whose Iran-based companies were EU-sanctioned front companies procuring laboratory equipment for Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs at the time. Alexander J. further supplied the sanctioned entity with two spectrometers listed in Annex II of this EU regulation, which lists items that are not on the EU dual-use control list (Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009) but that could contribute to sensitive activities, including enrichment-related activities, reprocessing or heavy-water-related activities.2 These items require a license on a case-by-case basis. In addition, Alexander J. violated the regulation by providing goods to an embargoed entity. In the third case, Alexander J. exported two listed spectrometers to a different, unspecified Iranian entity, also without the required license.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Sanctions, and Procurement
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

62. Accidental Allies: The US–Syrian Democratic Forces Partnership Against the Islamic State

Author:: Michael Knights and Wladimir van Wilgenburg
Publication Date:: 06-2021
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: To some, America's partnership with the SDF exemplified an economy-of-force effort that minimized U.S. casualties and wrested control of northeast Syria from the Islamic State. To others, it was a cautionary tale about a U.S. military hoodwinked into working with a terrorist group. The story of America’s military and political partnership with the Syrian Democratic Forces is a controversial one. To some, it is a shining example of an economy-of-force effort that minimized U.S. casualties, wrested control of northeast Syria from the Islamic State, and improved the area’s general political trajectory. To others, it is a cautionary tale of a U.S. military that was hoodwinked by a charismatic and capable partner closely tied to a U.S.-designated terrorist group, the Kurdistan Workers Party, with Washington deliberately averting its eyes from the strategic, political, and moral costs of the partnership. The subject deserves a neutral, data-led investigation that follows the facts wherever they lead. In this volume—copublished by The Washington Institute and I.B. Tauris—military expert Michael Knights and journalist Wladimir van Wilgenburg dive deep into the U.S. relationship with the SDF. The study benefited from intensive debates on sourcing, objectivity, and the need to probe uncomfortable issues. The findings cast light not only on the successes and shortcomings of this particular alliance, but also on how Washington might most profitably pursue “by, with, and through” operations with other forces in the future.
Topic:: Security, Politics, Terrorism, Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and Military
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

63. Structural Shifts and Regional Security: A View from Israel

Author:: Ehud Eiran
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:: Israel is still holding to its traditional security maxim. Based on a perception of a hostile region, Israel’s response includes early warning, deterrence and swift – including pre-emptive – military action, coupled with an alliance with a global power, the US. Israel is adjusting these maxims to a changing reality. Overlapping interests – and perhaps the prospect of an even more open conflict with Iran – led to limited relationships between Israel and some Gulf states. These, however, will be constrained until Israel makes progress on the Palestine issue. Israel aligned with Greece and Cyprus around energy and security, which may lead to conflict with Turkey. Russia’s deployment in Syria placed new constraints on Israeli freedom of action there. The US’s retrenchment from the Middle East is not having a direct effect on Israel, while the Trump administration’s support for Israel’s territorial designs in the West Bank may make it easier for Israel to permanently expand there, thus sowing the seeds for future instability in Israel/Palestine. The EU could try and balance against such developments, but, as seen from Israel, is too divided to have a significant impact. Paper produced in the framework of the FEPS-IAI project “Fostering a New Security Architecture in the Middle East”, April 2020.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Gas, and Hezbollah
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, Israel, Greece, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Cyprus, United States of America, and Mediterranean

64. Europe Needs a Regional Strategy on Iran

Author:: Cornelius Adebahr
Publication Date:: 05-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:: The rift between Europe and the United States over Iran is deepening. To regain leverage, the Europeans should engage all eight Gulf states in talks about regional security and nonproliferation. The rift between Europe and the United States over Iran is deepening. Two years of U.S. maximum pressure on Tehran have not yielded the results Washington had hoped for, while the Europeans have failed to put up enough resistance for their transatlantic partner to change course. Worse, the U.S. policy threatens to destabilize the broader Persian Gulf, with direct consequences for Europe. To get ahead of the curve and regain leverage, the European Union (EU), its member states, and the United Kingdom have to look beyond their relations with the Islamic Republic and address wider regional security challenges. The United States’ incipient retreat as a security guarantor and Russia’s increased interest in the region make it necessary for Europe to engage beyond its borders. Despite being barely alive, the 2015 international nuclear deal with Iran offers a good starting point. The Europeans should regionalize some of the agreement’s basic provisions to include the nuclear newcomers on the Arab side of the Gulf. Doing so would advance a nonproliferation agenda that is aimed not at a single country but at the region’s broader interests. Similarly, the Europeans should engage Iran, Iraq, and the six Arab nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council in talks about regional security. Rather than suggesting an all-encompassing security framework, for which the time is not yet ripe, they should pursue a step-by-step approach aimed at codifying internationally recognized principles at the regional level.
Topic:: Security, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Nonproliferation
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

65. Security Assistance in the Middle East: A Three-Dimensional Chessboard

Author:: Robert Springborg, F.C. "Pink" Williams, and John Zavage
Publication Date:: 02-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:: The United States, Russia, and Iran have chosen markedly different approaches to security assistance in the Middle East, with dramatic implications for statebuilding and stability. The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is the world’s testing ground for the effectiveness of security assistance provided by global and regional powers. That security assistance has contributed to the intensity and frequency of proxy wars—such as those under way or recently wound down in Libya, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq—and to the militarization of state and substate actors in the MENA region. Security assistance is at the core of struggles for military, strategic, ideological, and even economic preeminence in the Middle East. Yet despite the broad and growing importance of security assistance for the region and for competition within it between global and regional actors, security assistance has been the subject of relatively little comparative analysis. Efforts to assess relationships between the strategic objectives and operational methods of security assistance providers and their relative impacts on recipients are similarly rare.
Topic:: Security, Geopolitics, Political stability, and State Building
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

66. Iran’s foreign policy: Buying time until the US presidential elections

Author:: Mariette Hagglund
Publication Date:: 10-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: A key issue dominating Iran’s foreign policy agenda is the future of the Iran nuclear deal with regard to the next US president. Non-state armed groups mark the core of Iran’s leverage in the region, but Iran is currently looking into diversifying its means of influence. Although Iran considers its non-aligned position a strength, it is also a weakness. In an otherwise interconnected world, where other regional powers enjoy partnerships with other states and can rely on external security guarantors, Iran remains alone. By being more integrated into regional cooperation and acknowledged as a regional player, Iran could better pursue its interests, but US attempts to isolate the country complicate any such efforts. In the greater superpower competition between the US and China, Iran is unlikely to choose a side despite its current “look East” policy, but may take opportunistic decisions.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, and Elections
Political Geography:: United States, China, Iran, Middle East, Asia, and North America

67. The Arms Control–Regional Security Nexus in the Middle East

Author:: Tytti Erästö
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:: The erosion of the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement poses a risk for both Middle East regional security and the global nuclear non-proliferation regime. At the same time, it highlights the need to build a more sustainable regional foundation for conflict resolution and arms control in the Middle East. This paper argues that the arms control– regional security nexus should be better reflected in European policy. While maintaining the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and preventing further US–Iranian escalation should be the European Union’s (EU) first priority, the paper urges the EU to develop a more comprehensive approach in support of regional security, arms control and disarmament in the Middle East. In addition to resolving inconsistencies in current EU policies on regional security, arms control and arms exports to the Middle East, the EU should consider throwing its political weight behind two emerging processes that could provide a much-needed opening for regional cooperation: security dialogue in the Gulf and the annual Middle East weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-free zone conferences at the United Nations. If it involved regional non-proliferation cooperation, the former process could also help manage the negative consequences of the potential collapse of the Iran nuclear agreement.
Topic:: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, European Union, and Disarmament
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, and Middle East

68. Sanctions by the Numbers: Spotlight on Iran

Author:: Abigail Eineman
Publication Date:: 09-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: The June edition of “Sanctions by the Numbers” illustrated a decade of U.S. sanctions policy by using heat maps to show the countries with the largest number of designations. Across both the Trump and Obama administrations, Iran was always at the top of the list. This edition of Sanctions by the Numbers explores Iran sanctions further, tracking how designations and delistings have evolved over time, the dozens of countries affected by Iran-related sanctions programs, and the top types of U.S. designations. The data add to the existing consensus that sanctions have an inverse relationship with Iran’s economic health, and designations have far outpaced delistings in the last three years as part of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, and Economy
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

69. Reengaging Iran: A New Strategy for the United States

Author:: Ilan Goldenberg, Elisa Catalano Ewers, and Kaleigh Thomas
Publication Date:: 08-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: It appears unlikely that Iran will engage in diplomatic negotiations with President Donald Trump’s administration before the U.S. elections. However, the international community may find Iran ready to consider a return to negotiations in 2021—regardless of the results in November—either because of Iran’s interest in engaging a Biden administration or in an effort to avoid four more years of the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign. This report lays out potential options for a new U.S. administration to engage Iran in 2021. Many of the ideas also can be adapted for a second term Trump administration as described at the end of this report.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, and Engagement
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

70. Countering Iran in the Gray Zone: What the United States Should Learn from Israel’s Operations in Syria

Author:: Ilan Goldenberg, Nicholas Heras, Kaleigh Thomas, and Jennie Matuschak
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and especially since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Iran has become highly proficient in using its surrogates and proxies across the Middle East as a tool to achieve its interests while avoiding direct conflict with the United States. Successive U.S. presidents have sought options for pushing back against this Iranian strategy but have struggled to find approaches that could deter Iran’s actions or degrade its capabilities. In most cases U.S. administrations have been hesitant to respond at all, for fear of starting a larger conflict. The recent killing of Qassim Soleimani represents the opposite problem, in which the United States and Iran came unnecessarily close to a much larger war. In contrast, Israel’s “campaign between the wars” (the Hebrew acronym is mabam) against Iran and Iranian-backed groups in Syria has been one of the most successful military efforts to push back against Iran in the “gray zone.” Since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, and especially since early 2017, Israel has conducted more than 200 airstrikes inside Syria against more than 1,000 targets linked to Iran and it’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force (IRGCQF), and against IRGC-QF backed groups such as the Lebanese Hezbollah. This campaign has slowed Iran’s military buildup in Syria while avoiding a broader regional conflagration that would have been damaging to Israel’s interests.1 This study examines Israel’s mabam campaign and asks what lessons the United States can draw and how they may be applied to future U.S. actions in gray zone conflicts, both against Iran and more broadly.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Military Affairs, Conflict, and Syrian War
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Syria

71. The Coronavirus in Iran (Part 2): Regime Culpability and Resiliency

Author:: Mehdi Khalaji
Publication Date:: 03-2020
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Even as their lack of transparency worsens the public health crisis, the Supreme Leader and other officials have systematically gutted any civil society elements capable of organizing substantial opposition to such policies. Iran’s ongoing coronavirus epidemic has left the people with less reason than ever to trust the information and directives issued by their leaders. Part 1 of this PolicyWatch discussed the clergy’s role in aggravating this problem, but the state’s mistakes and deceptions have been legion as well. They include scandalous discrepancies between official reports after a period of denial that the virus had entered the country; a health system that was unprepared to deal with such a disease promptly and properly; and official resistance to implementing internationally recommended precautionary measures, such as canceling flights from China and quarantining the center of the outbreak. These decisions have sown widespread confusion about facts and fictions related to the virus, the most effective medically proven ways to control it, and the degree to which it is spreading throughout the country. As a result, an already restive population has become increasingly panicked about the future and angry at the state. Yet can the coronavirus actually bring down the regime? The harsh reality is that the state has left little space for opposition to organize around health issues, or any issues for that matter. Instead, it has sought to confuse the people and redirect their anger toward external enemies, even as its own policies contribute to the crisis.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Civil Society, Health, Public Health, and Coronavirus
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

72. Understanding EU-MENA Relations: Current and Changing Dynamics

Author:: Przemysław Osiewicz, Alex Vatanka, and Suzanne Kianpour
Publication Date:: 02-2020
Content Type:: Video
Institution:: Middle East Institute (MEI)
Abstract:: The relationship between the European Union and the Middle East is facing a critical period of change, given the changing leadership in key European Union bodies, rising tensions with regard to Iran, and increasing confrontation between the United States and Iran. The Middle East Institute is pleased to invite you to a conversation with MEI scholar Przemysław Osiewicz, who will discuss his recently released paper series on the impact of leadership changes in key EU bodies such as the EU high representative for foreign and security policy, the European Commission, and the European Council on EU-MENA relations. He will be joined by MEI Senior Fellow Alex Vatanka and moderator Suzanne Kianpour to explore divergences between the United States and the EU approaches in their policies toward Iran, internal divisions within the EU on engagement with Iran, the role of economic factors, and the future of the JCPOA.
Topic:: International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Politics, Geopolitics, and Leadership
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, United States of America, and European Union

73. Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses (CTTA) – Volume 12 Issue 02: Geopolitics and Jihadism in a Post-Soleimani Era

Author:: James M Dorsey, Raffaello Pantucci, Bilveer Singh, and Noor Huda Ismail
Publication Date:: 03-2020
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: Counter Terrorist Trends and Analysis
Institution:: Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:: The high-profile assassination of General Qassim Soleimani, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force (QF), on January 3 in Baghdad marked the lowest point in US-Iran relations in recent times. It triggered a new spell of geopolitical tensions in the Middle East with far-reaching consequences for South and Southeast Asia. Soleimani’s killing has also coincided with the potential rejuvenation of the Islamic State (IS), and ongoing anti-government protests in Iraq, Iran and Lebanon. Soleimani’s killing was bound to have reverberations beyond the Middle East. Muslim-majority states in South and Southeast Asia, where both Saudi Arabia and Iran have engaged in sectarian proxy wars by funding and influencing the Sunni and Shia segments of the population. While states in both regions have condemned Soleimani’s killing, they have stayed largely neutral to avoid getting sucked into rising geopolitical tensions. Against this backdrop, the March issue of the Counter Terrorists Trends and Analyses (CTTA) features three articles that explore different dimensions of Soleimani’s death and their geopolitical implications. In the first article, James M. Dorsey argues that as US-Iran tensions have eased in recent months, Iranian hardliners, emboldened by a sweeping mandate earned in recent domestic elections, remain committed to a well-honed strategy of escalating asymmetric warfare. According to the author, this raises the prospects for a full-scale war, with the United States also still pursuing a maximum pressure campaign on Iran that has to date, yet to produce tangible results. In the second article, Raffaello Pantucci reasons that despite a general consensus that the US-Iran rupture will ease pressure on transnational jihadist groups in the Middle East theatre, it remains unclear how Soleimani’s killing will shape their future behaviour. On the one hand, Iran-backed Shia militias are likely to step up their operations, which will exacerbate sectarian fault-lines in the region and feed into IS’ self-portrayal as the saviours of Sunnis. Conversely, pragmatism continues to define interactions between Tehran and Sunni jihadist groups such as the Islamic State and Al Qaeda, who appear happy to cooperate to ensure broader strategic goals. Next, Bilveer Singh examines the implications of Soleimani’s assassination for South and Southeast Asia. regions where both Iran and Saudi Arabia enjoy ideological influence among the Muslim-majority states. Sunni Malaysia and Indonesia have reservations about Tehran, but domestic political pressures are likely to endear Iran to them more than the US. The impact in South Asia could be more varied, mostly affecting Afghanistan and Pakistan. Iran through its Shia militant proxies can undermine US interests in Afghanistan. The QF has also recruited significant Shia militias in Afghanistan and Pakistan respectively for operations in Syria. Moreover, Pakistan has to walk a tight rope given Iran has an inside track to its significant Shia population. Besides cross and intra-regional assessments of Soleimani’s assassination within the broader US-Iran fissures, the threat landscapes in Indonesia and West Africa, both long-time hotbeds for terrorist activity in their respective regions, are also examined in this issue. Firstly, Noor Huda Ismail takes a closer look at pro-IS terrorist networks in Indonesia, a country that is home to the world’s largest Muslim population. By examining the background, tactics and modus operandi of local terrorist groups, both online and offline, and comparing their legacy with those of previous militant Islamist movements, the author believes important learning lessons can be drawn to help mitigate future security threats. Finally, Atta Barkindo analyses the jihadist threat in the Sahel region, where a landscape conducive to terrorist activities provides the fertile ground for IS and Al-Qaeda to grow by linking up with local militant networks. The tactical sophistication exhibited in terrorist attacks by Sahelian jihadist groups, particularly in Nigeria and the Lake Chad region, testifies to a growing footprint of global jihadism. Sahel provides an arterial life-line through the region, by facilitating the movement of goods and people between the Mediterranean and West Africa, which has been enormously beneficial to terrorist groups involved in organised criminal enterprises. Moreover, desertification and environmental degradation have also created a conducive environment for criminal activities and terrorism.
Topic:: Security, Terrorism, Bilateral Relations, Counter-terrorism, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, and Protests
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Lebanon, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

74. Iran’s Missiles and Its Evolving “Rings of Fire”

Author:: Uzi Rubin
Publication Date:: 01-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA)
Abstract:: Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s warning on the emergent Yemen-originating missile threat corresponds to Iran’s modus operandi of surrounding its foes with missile “rings of fire” and will enable Tehran to complete the missile encirclement of the Jewish state as a step toward its eventual demise. Israel must do its utmost to confront this new strategic threat by establishing an alert system and defense capabilities against Yemen-originating cruise and ballistic missiles, whatever the cost.
Topic:: Security, Military Affairs, Geopolitics, and Weapons
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, and Yemen

75. Implications of the Coronavirus Pandemic on the Stability of Iran and the Regional Situation

Author:: Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:: Iran’s official figures on cases and deaths from COVID-19 (the disease resulting from coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2) do not reflect the real scale of the pandemic in that country, which might be among the hardest hit in the world. The pandemic will deepen the economic crisis and disfunction of the state, becoming a challenge to Iran’s ruling elite. The regime might survive thanks to the security apparatus and, in parallel, continue its support of Shia militias in Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen, and the Syrian government. Only the succession of power after Ali Khamenei will be the real test of the coherence of the Iranian elite, and in case of disruption, it might result in the collapse of Iran’s theocracy.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Economics, Government, Health, Coronavirus, Pandemic, and Elites
Political Geography:: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syrian Arab Republic

76. The Significance of Targeting Soleimani

Author:: Ophir Falk
Publication Date:: 05-2020
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: American Diplomacy
Institution:: American Diplomacy
Abstract:: On January 3, 2020, American drone-launched missiles killed Major General Qassem Soleimani shortly after his landing at Baghdad International Airport in what may turn out to be the most significant targeted killing of the 21st century to date.[i] While it is too early to determine the long-term implications and effectiveness of this operation, there is no question that the US action showed it will hold Iran accountable for terrorist actions.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Qassem Soleimani, and Assassination
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

77. Pugwash Note on the Iran Nuclear Agreement and Middle Eastern Security

Author:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Publication Date:: 12-2020
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
Abstract:: This is a very short note addressing the issue of the Iran nuclear agreement and pointing out some key issues that are relevant to enhancing Middle Eastern security.
Topic:: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, Conflict, Peace, and Denuclearization
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

78. Troubled vision: Understanding recent Israeli–Iranian offensive cyber exchanges

Author:: JD Work and Richard Harknett
Publication Date:: 07-2020
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Atlantic Council
Abstract:: Reported Iranian intrusions against Israeli critical infrastructure networks and alleged Israeli actions against Iranian proliferation-associated targets pose substantial new challenges to understanding ongoing competition and conflict in the Middle East. These cyber exchanges may be interpreted through two distinct lenses: as the struggle to achieve deterrence using the instrument of cyber operations, or as the contest for initiative in order to establish conditions for relative security advantage in a cyber-persistent environment. Either way, these ongoing incidents are best understood not as “bolt out of the blue” attacks, but rather fleeting glimpses of continuing cyber campaigns leveraging previously disclosed and newly developed capabilities as each side grapples to anticipate cyber vulnerability and shape the conditions of exploitation. The opaque nature of these interactions is further complicated by potential bureaucratic politics and interservice rivalries, as well as unknown dynamics of a counter-proliferation campaign to slow, disrupt and potentially destroy Iranian nuclear capacity. In the end, observed cyber actions may not represent reflections of accurate strategic calculation, and even if aligned to the operational environment they may not lead to intended outcomes. Continuous failure to deter, or inability to manage persistent interactions, may lead to greater dangers.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Cybersecurity, and Non-Traditional Threats
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, and Israel

79. The Middle East between Collective Security and Collective Breakdown

Author:: International Crisis Group
Publication Date:: 04-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: International Crisis Group
Abstract:: For years, Gulf powers have mulled the notion of regional dialogue to calm existing crises and head off new ones. Today, with several active Middle Eastern conflicts, all sensitive to rising U.S.-Iran tensions, it is an idea whose time has come. What’s new?* Middle East tensions spiked in the past year following attacks on oil tankers and Saudi oil facilities, the U.S. killing of a senior Iranian commander and Iranian military retaliation. Some of Washington’s allies, losing confidence the U.S. will reliably extend military protection, have started making cautious diplomatic overtures to Iran. Why does it matter? While these tentative steps toward de-escalation are welcome, they risk being inadequate, particularly in the absence of regular, high-level communication channels among potential conflict actors. Existing UN-led mechanisms for resolving individual conflicts, such as Yemen, are worthwhile but insufficient to lessen region-wide tensions. What should be done? Diplomatic efforts are needed to both de-escalate tensions and make progress toward resolving regional conflicts. Gulf actors, supported by external stakeholders, should consider launching an inclusive sub-regional dialogue aimed at reducing the risk of inadvertent conflict by opening new communication channels.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

80. Security Review: Nagorno-Karabakh War Consequences

Author:: David Batashvili, Giorgio Bilanishvili, and Zurab Batiashvili
Publication Date:: 12-2020
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:: The Security Review section of the Rondeli Foundation regularly covers topics analyzing the threats facing Georgia, the changes in Georgia's external security environment and the challenges to Georgia's national security policy. Recently, the developments around Karabakh have seriously changed the previous status quo in our region, precipitating new and very significant circumstances, and have brought about a new reality to the countries of the South Caucasus as well as various important players with an interest in the region. Accordingly, the Rondeli Foundation pays special attention to a complex analysis of the new reality created in the context of Georgia's national security environment. To this end, a discussion series, entitled "New Reality in the South Caucasus," was organized in a webinar format providing the interested public with the opportunity to hear the assessments of experts from Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, Iran and Russia (the discussion series is available on the Rondeli Foundation's YouTube channel and Facebook page. The current issue of the Rondeli Foundation Security Review is also entirely dedicated to the new reality created in our region. It brings together the publications of the Foundation’s researchers that look at and evaluate the current situation from different angles.
Topic:: Security, National Security, War, and Conflict
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, Turkey, Caucasus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, South Caucasus, and Nagorno-Karabakh

81. Protests and Regime Suppression in Post-Revolutionary Iran

Author:: Saeid Golkar
Publication Date:: 10-2020
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:: Since its formation in 1979, the Islamic Republic has seen multiple cycles of unrest, from ethnic movements in the early 1980s to urban riots in the early 1990s, student protests spanning 1999-2003, the Green Movement response to the 2009 election, and the December 2017-January 2018 upheaval in smaller cities and urban fringes. The most recent instance, sparked in November 2019 by a gas tax hike, spread to as many as one hundred municipalities and still reverberates today. The hardline Iranian regime has successfully put down all challenges to its authority thus far, causing numerous injuries and deaths in the process. State agents are also known to have perpetrated torture in prisons. But as Saeid Golkar contends in this prescient Policy Note, a climate of coercion has undermined Tehran’s legitimacy and its ability to coopt various social classes. Future protests, if they continue to grow in volume and violence, could exhaust even the regime’s multilayered security forces.
Topic:: Security, History, Social Movement, Protests, and Revolution
Political Geography:: Iran and Middle East

82. Stabilizing forces growing stronger

Author:: Eran Lerman
Publication Date:: 09-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The peace deals between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain mark the completion of an existing process by which the region’s stabilizing forces are banding together against the Iranian threat.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Political stability, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, Israel, Bahrain, and UAE

83. The China-Iran Agreement is not a Strategic Shift

Author:: Tuvia Gering and Yossi Mansharof
Publication Date:: 08-2020
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:: The long-term agreement between the two countries has not been finalized, and its scope and security implications seem to be limited. It is unlikely to force Israel into a complete reconsideration of its economic ties to China.
Topic:: Security, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Hegemony, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:: China, Iran, Israel, and Asia

84. 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

85. 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

86. 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

87. 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

88. 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

89. 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

90. The Strategic Implications of Chinese-Iranian-Russian Naval Drills in the Indian Ocean

Author:: Syed Fazl-e Haider
Publication Date:: 01-2020
Content Type:: Journal Article
Journal:: China Brief
Institution:: The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:: In early December, Major General Shao Yuanming (邵元明), the Deputy Chief of the Joint Staff Department of the Central Military Commission of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), traveled to the Islamic Republic of Iran for rare high-level military meetings. These meetings were held for the purpose of organizing a series of unprecedented joint naval drills between China, Iran, and Russia, which were held in the Indian Ocean and the Sea of Oman from December 27–29. The drills took place just as escalating tensions between the United States and Iran reached a crisis point at the end of 2019. The exercise also signified a deepening relationship between Iran and the PRC in economics, diplomacy, and security affairs. China and Russia have both increased military and economic cooperation with Iran in the year and a half since the U.S. government pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). However, while Iran’s government has repeatedly touted its deepening relations with China and Russia as a show of diplomatic strength, its allies have been less public about the growing relationship. In December, Iranian officials lauded the trilateral exercises—titled “Marine Security Belt”—as proof that Iran can outlast crippling sanctions with aid from its non-Western allies, and declared that the drills signaled a new triple alliance in the Middle East (Tasnim News, December 29, 2019). [1] By contrast, officials from Russia and the PRC were more restrained, framing the joint exercises as part of routine anti-piracy operations, highlighting their peacekeeping priorities and seeking to depoliticize the drills (South China Morning Post, September 23, 2019; Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Russia), October 2, 2019).
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Navy, Maritime, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:: Russia, China, Europe, Iran, Middle East, and Asia

91. Gulf of difference: How Europe can get the Gulf monarchies to pursue peace with Iran

Author:: Cinzia Bianco
Publication Date:: 12-2020
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:: The Gulf monarchies face a core dilemma: advancing their security interests through deterrence or through promoting a new diplomatic process. The arrival of the Biden administration in Washington, and the perception of US disengagement from the region, offers an opportunity for Europeans to help de-escalate tensions between GCC states and Iran. The European interest lies in supporting a return to the Iranian nuclear deal and a regional dialogue between the Gulf monarchies and Iran, an approach that is more likely to promote lasting stability. Europeans can support this process by strengthening their own regional security posture and confronting head-on the geopolitical tensions at the heart of regional rivalries.
Topic:: Security, Regional Cooperation, Gulf Cooperation Council, and Dialogue
Political Geography:: Europe, Iran, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

92. 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

93. Escalation or Negotiation? Conclusions of a Tabletop Exercise on the Future of U.S.-Iran Relations

Author:: Elisa Catalano Ewers, Ilan Goldenberg, Nicholas Heras, and Kaleigh Thomas
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:: On May 21, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) hosted an all-day tabletop exercise (TTX) in Washington, D.C., to game out three scenarios related to the crisis surrounding U.S.-Iran tensions over Iran’s nuclear enrichment program and destabilizing regional policies. The intent was to understand how key players would respond and act in these potential scenarios. The TTX included seven teams: the United States, Iran, Europe (representing primarily France, Germany, and the United Kingdom but also the European Union), China, Russia, Israel, and the Gulf Arab States (one player as Saudi Arabia/UAE and the other player as Oman). Teams featured American and foreign regional and functional experts with a deep experience in their respective areas. Players were asked to play the most realistic version of their government.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

94. Cyber-Security: The Threats from Russia and the Middle East

Author:: Ferry de Kerckhove
Publication Date:: 12-2019
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:: The art of war has changed considerably since the end of the Second World War. In the last 15 years, the centre of gravity has slowly shifted from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The West is increasingly being destabilized. Hybrid warfare and cyber-attacks have become increasingly effective alternatives to both hard and soft power. Russia is a major player in this domain; so is Iran. Other players are joining the fray, most of them hostile to the West, such as Iran and Russia’s client states. The barriers between civilian and military are fading quickly. All-out war now happens in a space that’s invisible to the naked eye. Not only is such warfare threatening us, but it also has consequences we have barely begun to assess. The divide between good and bad is blurring. Marshall McLuhan said the medium is the message. Today, the medium and the message are an undecipherable continuum where evil and lies coexist with truth and goodwill. Technological prowess increases vulnerability, but technology is also at the heart of corresponding systems of security. Thus, we have fully entered a new arms race where deterrence comes from the other side knowing what you don’t want him to discover, but what you want him to fear. Voltaire said: “If you wish to speak to me, let us start by defining the meaning of our words.” In this day and age, this mantra is particularly applicable to the definition of contemporary threats as well as of the targets, or even who is in the sights of Russian and Middle Eastern leaders. “Cyberspace is a domain characterized by the use of electronics and the electromagnetic spectrum to store, modify, and exchange data via networked systems and associated physical infrastructures. In effect, cyberspace can be thought of as the interconnection of human beings through computers and telecommunication, without regard to physical geography.” Consequently, “(c)ybersecurity is the practice of protecting systems, networks, and programs from digital attacks. These cyberattacks are usually aimed at accessing, changing, or destroying sensitive information; extorting money from users; or interrupting normal business processes. Implementing effective cybersecurity measures is particularly challenging today because there are more devices than people, and attackers are becoming more innovative.” Discussions focus on whether Russia or China is the heavyweight in terms of threat. Some argue that China is more subtle while Russia is more of a rogue. But it is undeniable that China’s attempt to change the fundamental paradigm of international relations, while using and hopefully subduing the existing international order’s mechanisms to its advantage, represents a holistic approach and is thus more threatening to the world if it even partly succeeds. Indeed, the planet’s centre of gravity is moving from the Atlantic to the Pacific and that means the global threat comes from China. If we needed a reminder, in 2014 Chinese hackers stole the personal information of more than 22 million people connected to U.S. security clearance processes. Not bad for five years ago!
Topic:: Security, Science and Technology, and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:: Russia, Iran, and Middle East

95. What Happens to Israel If the US and Iran Go to War?

Author:: Louis René Beres
Publication Date:: 09-2019
Content Type:: Special Report
Institution:: The Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA)
Abstract:: On core matters of peace and security, two closely interrelated questions must be asked: 1. What precisely does Donald Trump have in mind regarding any potential armed conflict with Iran? 2. What might such a possibility portend for Israel, a US ally? Answers to these questions must extend beyond narrowly partisan simplifications. They should be nuanced and subtly overlapping. At a minimum, once a shooting war were underway, the Israeli armed forces (IDF) could become involved, possibly to a substantial degree. In a worst case scenario, clashes would involve unconventional weapons and directly affect Israel’s civilian population. The worst of the worst could involve nuclear ordnance.
Topic:: Security, War, Nuclear Power, Peace, and Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, United States of America, and Israel

96. Iran Has a Slow Motion Banking Crisis

Author:: Adnan Mazarei
Publication Date:: 06-2019
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:: Suffering under Western sanctions and security challenges, Iran faces problems as well from its fragile banking system, which has been languishing for decades. Liquidity and solvency weaknesses pose a growing risk to the country’s financial stability. The sanctions reimposed by the United States in 2018 have heightened these vulnerabilities, but the problems also result from the heavy-handed role of the state, corruption, and the Central Bank of Iran’s failure to regulate and supervise the system. Iran’s ability to avoid a run on its banks is aided by their reliance on liquidity assistance, deposit insurance, and regulatory forbearance from the central bank. Depositors are forced to be patient because they have limited options to invest elsewhere. Iran has thus avoided a full-blown banking crisis. But the situation is not sustainable. Banks remain susceptible to external shocks, which could come from a complete halt to oil exports or war.
Topic:: Security, Financial Crisis, Sanctions, Banks, and Financial Institutions
Political Geography:: Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America

97. 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

98. 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

99. 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

100. 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

Search

Search Constraints

Search Results

Refine your search

Topic

Political Geography

Content Type

Journal

Publishing Institution

Author

Publication Year

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS