Research Library

The Iran nuclear deal marks a significant victory for both the Obama administration and the government of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. On balance, the agreement is a good one. But make no mistake: it might yet fail.

In the current absence of direct negotiations, the Obama administration has an opportunity to reshape the Israeli-Palestinian negotiating framework, according to a report by the Conflict Resolution Program at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The report recommends that the administration continue to demonstrate strong U.S. support for the two-state model, test the willingness of the parties to compromise and adopt a more comprehensive approach to resolving the conflict with the support of the international community.

Iran — as it has since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 — represents a challenge to U.S. foreign policy. But it is one best addressed through a combination of firm action where necessary and flexible diplomacy where possible.

This week, negotiators announced the framework of a nuclear agreement — ultimately, a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — with Iran. If a final deal can be struck and if the agreement holds, this deal will mark a historic foreign policy achievement, writes Joe Barnes.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s victory in the March 17 Israeli elections proved one thing: He is a politician of the very highest order. His party, Likud, won and — by the standards of recent Israeli elections — won big. This is in many ways a personal triumph for Netanyahu, who is already Israel’s second-longest serving prime minister. But what will Netanyahu’s triumph mean for U.S.-Israeli relations?

Will Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech before Congress lead to a diplomatic showdown on Iran?

This report suggests the contours of a more comprehensive policy for the United States in the broader Middle East, one that pursues not only important tactical approaches to counter Islamic extremism and terrorism, but also shapes the larger strategic landscape to secure and promote U.S. interests. After defining the challenge for the United States and the international community, the report provides a brief narrative on the rise of ISIS before presenting key policy recommendations for a more strategic approach.

The changing regional geopolitics of the Middle East have created new opportunities for the Gulf states to engage in Arab-Israeli conflict resolution after the Arab Spring. This policy report examines the potential role that the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states — Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) — might play in Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution. It presents policy recommendations on how the Gulf states can engage with regional and international partners and build upon the greater space for action as the shifting parameters of Middle East politics create new regional pathways for action and cooperation.

Fossil fuel subsidies have allowed energy exporting countries to distribute resource revenue, bolstering legitimacy for governments, many of which are not democratically elected. But subsidy benefits are dwarfed by the harmful consequences of encouraging uneconomic use of energy. Now, with consumption posing a threat to long-term exports, governments face a heightened need to raise prices that have come to be viewed as entitlements. While reforms of state benefits are notoriously politically dangerous, previous experience shows that subsidies can be rolled back without undermining government legitimacy — even in autocratic settings — given proper preparation.