Middle East & North Africa

15 Items

Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy

Why Do So Many People Want So Little From the Agreement With Iran?

| September 15, 2015

"...[K]eeping Iran at arm's length (or worse) reduces U.S. diplomatic leverage and flexibility. As long as U.S. Middle East policy remains fixated on its 'special relationships' with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and to some extent Egypt, these states will continue to take U.S. support for granted and ignore U.S. preferences more often than we'd like. But if the United States had decent working relations with every state in the region — including Iran — it could work constructively with any or all of them."

News

Podcast: "Can the United States 'Manage' the Middle East? Should it Try?" with Stephen M. Walt

| May 5, 2015

An audio recording from Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School.

On April 29, 2015 at MEI, Prof. Stephen Walt assessed U.S. policy and interests in the Middle East, arguing that scaled back involvement might yield better results for the U.S. and the region.

Negotiations table during meeting of world leaders in Vienna on November 24, 2014 to discuss Iran's nuclear program

Getty Images

Analysis & Opinions - Agence Global

Important Lessons from the Iran Negotiations

| November 26, 2014

"This week’s extension in the negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 is a welcomed jolt of composure and realism in a process that for years has been characterized by wild allegations, emotional retorts and intemperate actions. The decision to extend talks and keep negotiating to achieve a final agreement by next summer seems to cement the decision to deal with the accusations of Iran’s alleged desire to obtain a nuclear bomb as a technical issue that has a technical solution, rather than a continuation of the tendency of the United States and Israel, primarily, to treat Iran as a hapless colonial subject."

teaser image

Magazine Article - GlobalPost

Iran nuclear deal: 3 Questions with Ambassador Nick Burns

| November 24, 2013

Iran and six world powers clinched a deal on Sunday curbing the Iranian nuclear program in exchange for initial sanctions relief. Sounds pretty good, but of course nothing is that simple and already Israel has called it a "historic mistake." Which is it? And what's going to happen next? Harvard Kennedy School professor and GlobalPost senior foreign affairs columnist, Nicholas Burns, weighs in.

American-Iranian Accusations Are a Good Sign

Creative Commons

Analysis & Opinions - Agence Global

American-Iranian Accusations Are a Good Sign

| Nov. 19, 2013

We should be cheering the fact that the American and Iranian foreign ministers are now trading accusations in public about who is to blame for the lack of a full agreement in last week’s Geneva negotiations on the issues of Iran’s nuclear industry and the UN and American sanctions on Iran. It is so much healthier to have the foreign ministers exchanging ideas of how to reach a negotiated agreement than to have them threaten each other with more sanctions and faster development of nuclear capabilities.

An Institute of Politics forum asked its panel of policy experts if Syria should be attacked. It also allowed audience participation. With clickers in hand, 45 percent of the audience cast their vote in favor of military action and 55 percent voted no.

Rose Lincoln/Harvard Staff Photographer

Magazine Article - Harvard Gazette

Volatile Syria

| September 12, 2013

Read about the Harvard Kennedy School’s JFK Jr. Forum event that drew more than 700 people on Wednesday night to listen to an expert panel discuss Syria. The panel of Graham Allison, Joseph Nye, Nicholas Burns, Marisa Porges, and Niall Ferguson, debated on whether or not the U.S. should intervene militarily in Syria. At the end of the Forum, the audience was polled for their take, with 55 percent voting against military action.