Research Library

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.

Peter Hotez, fellow in disease and poverty, testified about the continuing threat of neglected tropical diseases before the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations.

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.

This study examines the effects of lifting the 40-year-old U.S. crude export ban on crude pricing, energy security and energy sector investment. It includes a statistical analysis that explains what the relationship would be between the prices of crudes of different qualities in an unconstrained setting, which, according to author Ken Medlock, is important to providing a more accurate assessment of the impact of current U.S. policy.

The only women elected to Bahrain’s new parliament are all Shi’a. While the Shi’a community in Bahrain is often considered to be economically and politically marginalized from the regime, the winning female candidates are wealthy and linked professionally with the regime.

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.

Currently the Nigerian state is undergoing a civil war, with the protagonist being the Salafi-jihadi group popularly called Boko Haram. During the years since 2011, Boko Haram has morphed from being a local Salafi-jihadi group into a major player in West African radicalism. During the period since July 2014, Boko Haram has clearly set the establishment of a physical Islamic state in Nigeria as its goal and has fought the Nigerian military to a draw. While there is some support among the U.S. foreign policy community for proactively combating Boko Haram, the Nigerian civil war is not one that commands much interest among Americans as a whole. Nor is it clear the manner in which aid for fighting Boko Haram could be rendered or what exactly would be the acceptable scope of such a conflict for the United States. In this paper, author David Cook argues that there are only extreme circumstances under which the United States should involve itself in the Nigerian civil war and that thus far this conflict does not coincide with those circumstances. However, it is possible that with Boko Haram set upon the establishment of an Islamic state there could come a set of circumstances under which this reality could change.

A new analysis reveals substantial global health gains for AIDS, malaria and neglected tropical diseases that were first targeted by the administration of President George W. Bush in 2003 and then greatly expanded by the Obama administration. Beginning in 2016, an incoming administration will have opportunities to build on this legacy to control and eliminate poverty-related diseases — including those with pandemic potential — and to assert American leadership while being mindful of fiscal constraints.

As the United States once again ramps up involvement in Iraq, it makes sense to examine U.S. interests and strategy while considering what might constitute realistic parameters for participation and outcome. In this issue brief, energy fellow Jim Krane explores answers to the question "What are U.S. interests in Iraq and how are they best pursued?"

Thursday's Baker Institute Blog carries a commentary from fellow Joe Barnes on President Obama’s Sept. 10, 2014, speech on ISIS and Iraq.