It is too early to tell whether or not the recently signed Iran deal will have a drastic effect on Iran’s domestic political climate.
The Iran nuclear deal has yielded neither a verifiable Iranian commitment to restrict its nuclear endeavors to the parameters of a peaceful energy program, nor a mechanism that reliably prevents Iran from funneling the enormous unfrozen funds provided to it to all the wrong causes.
After a generation of subordinating so much to the priority of the peace process, it seems that the point of negotiations might have been allowing a new round of negotiations.
The United States has come out squarely to endorse a deal that tries to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons predominantly relying on positive inducements to get Iran to comply with its new formal commitments.
Doubts have been raised and criticisms continue to be made about Lebanon’s choice of upstream petroleum fiscal terms and strategies to award oil and gas licenses.
With the peace process at a standstill, it is now time to begin thinking about incremental alternatives focused on improving lives and renewing efforts with international organizations.
Unless the self-proclaimed Islamic State is stopped, and unless Iran both adheres to the terms of the nuclear deal and moderates its behavior, Obama’s successor will inherit problems as serious as the problems he inherited.
A new French initiative at the United Nations aims to break the deadlock and accelerate progress toward a lasting solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
President Putin’s decision to lift the ban on the transfer of the S-300 air defense system to Iran signals a new departure for Moscow’s policy in the Middle East.
The Joint List’s approach to engagement offers Palestinians a model for political action. But it also highlights the contradictions and tensions inherent to Palestinian approaches over the past 22 years.