Iran Review > What Others Think
When it comes to Iran, how many failures is enough for Pompeo?
Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Muhammad Sahimi
For many years Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has worked to bring Iran to heel, if not to destroy the Islamic Republic altogether. He would presumably prefer to accomplish those ends through economic and political warfare, but it is unlikely he would object to military attacks if that is what it takes. As a Congressman from Kansas as early as 2014, he was urging Washington to attack Tehran’s nuclear facilities, noting it would take “under 2,000 sorties,” or bombings, to do the job. “This is not an insurmountable task for the coalition forces,” he said.

Israel, the UAE, & Bahrain didn’t sign peace deals, they’re military alliances to counter Iran
Friday, September 18, 2020

Mitchell Plitnick
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signed agreements with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain in Washington. Brokered by the Trump administration, these deals represent two of the most broadly popular developments for both Trump and Netanyahu in many years.

Progressives urge House Dems to help Biden save the Iran nuclear deal
Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Matthew Petti
Sixteen progressive groups have signed a letter urging the next House Foreign Affairs Committee chair to help a “potential Biden administration” save the nuclear deal with Iran.

Why is Iran developing missiles and bolstering regional proxies?
Sunday, September 6, 2020

Jalil Bayat
Trump purportedly wants a new deal with Iran which will not only prevent it from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but will also limit the country’s missile program and cut its support for proxy forces in the region. But he seemingly pays no attention to what motivates Iran to develop a missile program or to form regional proxies.

JCPOA parties say US cannot invoke UN sanctions snapback under UNSCR 2231
Thursday, September 3, 2020

The participant states of the Joint Commission of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) reaffirmed on Tuesday evening that the United States unilaterally pulled out of the JCPOA on May 8, 2018 and therefore cannot invoke the UN sanctions snapback under UNSC resolution 2231.

Joe Biden must elaborate his Iran policy
Wednesday, September 2, 2020

Shireen Hunter
Since Donald Trump became president in 2017, U.S.-Iran relations have steadily deteriorated. This downward trend in relations accelerated following the United States’ withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, in May 2018.

After Beirut blast, Israel revives tales of Hezbollah ammonium nitrate terror plots
Friday, August 28, 2020

Gareth Porter
Israeli intelligence is polishing off a dubious propaganda campaign to suggest Hezbollah was to blame for the recent catastrophe in Beirut. But the factual record either contradicts Israeli claims or reveals a complete dearth of evidence.

Snapback: The last gasp of Trump’s failed Iran strategy
Sunday, August 23, 2020

Ryan Costello
With Americans dealing with a pandemic and many focused on the elections, the Trump administration is putting on a diplomatic theater of the absurd at the United Nations Security Council.

It doesn’t matter who wins in November, Iran will not renegotiate the JCPOA
Wednesday, August 19, 2020

Saheb Sadeghi
The upcoming US presidential elections in November will likely determine whether the Iran nuclear deal survives. If Donald Trump wins re-election, Iran is likely to quit the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and alter its nuclear doctrine to give it more leverage in any future negotiations. If Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, is elected, both Iran and the United States could move towards reviving the JCPOA, but Iran will remain reluctant to expand its terms.

Don’t delay military withdrawal from the Middle East
Sunday, August 16, 2020

Gareth Porter
The Quincy Institute’s “New Paradigm for the Middle East” calling for a definitive end to the disastrous policy the United States has pursued in the region for nearly two decades offers the first coherent analysis of what is wrong with that policy and the first conceptual framework for a fundamentally different approach. The paper makes it clear, moreover, that the U.S. military presence continues to be a crucial part of the problem.