Without a firm constitutional basis, early elections in Libya would not only produce a government whose legitimacy is contested even more widely, but also leave the door open for another strongman to rise to power.
Whatever the outcome of Turkey’s June 24 elections, a new presidential system will come into effect and the foreign policy, economic, and social ramifications will be significant.
The negative consequences of pulling out of the JCPOA could be diminished by aligning the goals announced by the Trump administration into an operational, strategic agenda.
While Iran’s positive political transformation may be a worthy goal, the Trump administration’s reckless execution of this strategy could serve to resuscitate an ailing regime.
Europe remains at fault for both failing to rebuild Libya following its 2011 intervention, and for increasingly relying on rights-abusing militias for its coast guard and migrant interdiction responsibilities.
The Trump administration does not have a plan to get Iran to do anything the United States wants. Pompeo’s new strategy to counter Iran’s behavior across the Middle East is just a long wish list of demands.
Absent effective institutions, Libya has struggled and devolved into civil war since the fall of Qaddafi. But while the country has dropped off Western radars since the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, the story of Libya is far from finished.
The chance of war may be much greater than before President Trump made the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal.
Gulf-based Salafi financiers have had a diminished role in the Syrian civil war recently, but their influence will linger in the country's religious sphere.
While the Middle East’s central battle line is changing, Egypt is pursuing a strategy of opportunism that aims to maximize its returns and preserve its options.
Tunisia’s decentralization process has tremendous potential. Yet the central government, local government, civil society, and international donors must each invest in the process.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal appears to have put regime change at the very center of the new American power play against Tehran.
U.S. President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal should propel Europeans to stand their ground and mark the beginning of a more independent role for Europe in the world.
A discussion of the brewing conflict between Israel and Iran, the impact of the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, and Moscow’s role in the Middle East.
The United States will be worse off from leaving the Iran deal. Either Iran will succeed in exploiting a wedge between America and its allies, leaving Washington isolated and unable to lead a coalition to address other provocations, or Iran will return to an unconstrained nuclear program.
U.S President Donald Trump may have Israel and Saudi Arabia on his side. But without a hint of any strategic contingency planning by the White House, it would appear that the United States can expect to pay for the Iran decision in spades—from western Europe to the Pacific.
Now that the Trump administration has left the JCPOA, EU governments are looking to Washington to set out how they intend to build a negotiated solution to shared concerns.
Algeria’s regime has repeatedly adapted the political system in limited ways. But what has worked for the regime up until now may not work indefinitely into the future.
The Trump administration appears committed to working "by-with-through" local partners in the Middle East. Doing so effectively requires a clear political strategy and continued diplomatic engagement in the region.
What Trump might decide on the Iran Deal and what happens after.