11 Items

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad  during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, October 20, 2015.

Kremlin.ru

Analysis & Opinions - Moscow Times

Russia Must Abandon Assad to Fight Terrorism

| November 13, 2015

"The key to a solution to both — the quagmire that has unfolded in Syria and the threat posed by Islamic terrorism — is to deprive the terrorist groups of their main propaganda tools and to form a new Syrian government that excludes Assad (and his foreign Shiite allies) but includes representatives from all of the non-fundamentalist groups involved in the civil war."

Kurdistan Flag, Germiyan Province, Iraqi Kurdistan, 21 April 2011. The Kurdish areas in the Middle East are mainly divided between Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey. There are also a number of extremist groups throughout these Kurdish areas.

Wikimedia CC

Analysis & Opinions - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School

Do Homework Before Supporting Groups in ISIS Fight

| August 25, 2014

"The United States and several key regional states, including Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey may have very different interests, but they all have a shared interest in better understanding and working together to stop groups that dislike Americans as much as Jews, Persians, Shi’as, secular Muslims, and the Saudi monarchy. They should refrain from empowering and expressing blind support for a group or entity without fully understanding it first."

Maryam Rajavi,  president-elect of the People's Mujahideen Organisation (MEK)'s political wing, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, December 2006.

Wikimedia CC

Analysis & Opinions - The National Interest

Beware of the MEK

| August 22, 2014

"...[T]o understand the origins of anti-Americanism in pre-revolutionary Iran, look no further. The MEK was responsible for the assassination and failed attempts to kidnap and assassinate Americans in Iran in the 1970s. It was also the MEK that pressured the Islamic revolutionaries to take a stronger stance against the United States. The MEK further supported the 1979 U.S. embassy hostage crisis in Tehran."

Southern Sudanese people are seen through a Southern Sudanese flag lining up to vote in Juba, Southern Sudan, Jan. 9, 2011. About 4 million Southern Sudanese voters began casting their ballots on Jan. 9 in a weeklong referendum on independence.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - The Guardian

Southern Sudan Has Many Lessons to Learn from Juba University

| July 5, 2011

"Critics of the role of universities in economic transformation argue that higher education takes too long to show results and that its focus is usually too academic. However, the evidence suggests that practically oriented universities offer the fastest and most durable ways to incubate new states. With the right vision, universities can confer their attributes to a new state."

In this 1987 file photo, mujahedeen guerrillas sit atop a captured Soviet T-55 tank. The U.S. military presence in Afghanistan surpassed the Soviet occupation of the country on Nov. 25, 2010.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - Iranian Diplomacy

The U.S. War on Terror after Bin Laden

| May 11, 2011

The United States' wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are unlikely to come to an end, even after the death of Osama Bin Laden. These wars which were initiated and continued based on the sacred and ideological aim of the complete destruction of world terrorism (Al Qaeda) will simultaneously provide the grounds for local and opposing forces to justify their resistance in the form of a sacred ideological war against foreign occupiers. In the case of a bilateral ideological war, with no possible winner, therefore the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which have mostly local and regional roots, will not come to end in the near future.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, center, shakes hands with an unidentified Afghan official during a meeting with Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmai Rasoul, left, as Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, looks on, in Tehran, Iran, July 15, 2010.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - Iranian Diplomacy

The U.S. Midterm Elections and Iran

| November 14, 2010

"Following the parliamentary elections of Iraq in March 2010 and the long-time deadlock which had stalled formation of the coalition government for nearly 8 months and the West's disappointing efforts to talk with the Taliban, it is now crystal-clear that the United States cannot tackle these crises single-handedly and needs Iran's cooperation as the main regional actor in settling the crises in Iraq and Afghanistan, either during the presence and even after the withdrawal of American troops from both countries. The importance of this issue becomes manifest as one realizes that curbing terrorist activities in this region is directly connected to the establishment of security and stability in the region after the withdrawal of foreign troops. In such circumstances, Iran's role for the establishment and preservation of stability becomes crucial."

President Barack Obama meets with Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych during the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, April 12, 2010.

AP Photo

Analysis & Opinions - The Huffington Post

The Ties That Bind Are Not Always Best

| April 27, 2010

"Non-binding agreements, such as the Nuclear Summit's communiqué ... have the benefit of being developed and implemented quickly. Countries can more easily reach agreement, in the knowledge that an inability to comply will not result in harsh sanction. Yet, these agreements are not toothless, as opponents would claim. By publicly committing to adhere to the communiqué's principles, countries signal their intentions, and can damage their reputation if they fail to deliver. Many countries made national commitments in addition to the communiqué, to which they can be held accountable. For example, Ukraine committed to removing all highly enriched uranium from its territory by the next Summit in 2012. Ukraine's progress can be monitored and pressure brought to bear if its commitment is not met."

Analysis & Opinions

Stephen M. Walt on the U.S., Iran, and the New Balance of Power in the Persian Gulf

| August 5, 2008

Walt: “…..by maintaining a (new) balance you don’t get conflict breaking out and you tilt in favour whichever side seems to be falling behind. At the same time, you do try to discourage conflict whenever possible. You certainly don’t try to control the region yourselves and if the balance breaks down as it did in 1991 and you have to intervene you go in, you get out as quickly as possible. But you don’t try to organize these societies. You don’t try to tell them how to live. You don’t try to tell them how their governments should be organized and you don’t try to transform them at the point of a rifle barrel. This is not disengagement, but it is also not trying to control the region or dictate its political evolution.”

“…we are not going to have a stable long-term situation in the Persian Gulf until the United States and other countries in the region—including Iran—do come to some understanding about the various issues that concern them.  Achieving that goal will require genuine diplomacy…The United States will also have to recognize that Iran’s size, potential power, large population, and its geo-strategic location inevitably make it a major player in the security environment in the Persian Gulf, and ignoring that fact is unrealistic…”