IRAN
AP Photo
January 14, 2013
"Chuck Hagel Will Too Set Policy"
Op-Ed, Boston Globe
By Juliette Kayyem, Lecturer in Public Policy
"The idea that high-level officials, like Roberts or Hagel, merely administer rules set forth by others is a fiction. The secretary of defense has an incredibly powerful position. Indeed, it was the triumph of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's ideology over other alternatives that led to the mess Obama inherited four years ago. Hagel, presumably, has a different approach to matching operational capacity with policy decisions. That is why Obama picked him in the first place."
January 11, 2013
"Mainstream Support of Hagel: Is This a Crack in the Wall of Intimidation?"
Op-Ed, The Huffington Post
By Charles G. Cogan, Associate, International Security Program
"Does all this represent a crack in the wall of intimidation, to use the word of Mr. Hagel to Mr. Miller? Will the message get through to Benjamin Netanyahu, Avigdor Lieberman, et al to stop interfering in the American political process?"
December 2012
"A WMD-Free Zone in the Middle East: Creating the Conditions for Sustained Progress"
Discussion Paper
By Martin B. Malin, Executive Director, Project on Managing the Atom and Paolo Foradori, Associate, Project on Managing the Atom/International Security Program
How can the states of the Middle East begin to create the political conditions for achieving sustained progress toward the elimination of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons? This paper examines the challenges and obstacles that the parties of the region will need to overcome to bring a WMD-free zone into force, and recommends near-term steps for improving regional security.
IAEA
December 20, 2012
"IAEA’s Integral Role in Ending the Iranian Nuclear Crisis"
Op-Ed, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
By Olli Heinonen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and Mark Hibbs
There is a small opening to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis after the conclusion of the U.S. presidential election, write Mark Hibbs and Olli Heinonen. "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called this a 'window of opportunity,' and it is beginning to focus minds on identifying the necessary components of a package deal that will put Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and UN Security Council powers squarely on a path toward conflict resolution."
AP Photo
December 2012
"The Leap in North Korea's Ballistic Missile Program: The Iran Factor"
Policy Brief
By John S. Park, Associate, Project on Managing the Atom
John S. Park, Stanton Nuclear Security Junior Faculty Fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Project on Managing the Atom Associate, argues that cooperation between North Korea and Iran has been a critical—yet underexamined—enabler of North Korea's recent success. He concludes that the time has come for the United States to view the two previously independent missile programs as two sides of the same coin and recommends strategies for disrupting the procurement channels between Iran and North Korea.
AP Photo
December 14, 2012
"The Interview: Stephen M. Walt"
Op-Ed, Diplomat
By Zachary Keck and Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs; Faculty Chair, International Security Program
"The United States is out of Iraq and is getting out of Afghanistan, but the big question is whether we can keep ourselves from being dragged back into the Middle East quagmire in the future. The best course in the Middle East would be to act as an "offshore balancer": ready to intervene if the balance of power is upset, but otherwise keeping our military footprint small. We should also have normal relationship with states like Israel and Saudi Arabia, instead of the counterproductive "special relationships" we have today. Steps like these would free up the resources for a more robust presence in Asia, should that become advisable down the road. But we should act like an "offshore balancer" in Asia as well...."
AP Photo
Winter 2012/13
"Is a Nuclear Deal with Iran Possible? An Analytical Framework for the Iran Nuclear Negotiations"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 3, volume 37
By James K. Sebenius, Gordon Donaldson Professor of Business Administration, HBS, Belfer Center Faculty Affiliate and Michael K. Singh
Varied diplomatic approaches by multiple negotiators over the past several years have failed to conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. Mutual hostility, misperception, and flawed diplomacy may be responsible. Yet, more fundamentally, no mutually acceptable deal may exist. To assess this possibility, a “negotiation analytic” framework conceptually disentangles two issues: (1) whether a feasible deal exists; and (2) how to design the most promising process to achieve one.
December 11, 2012
"The Iranian Nuclear Negotiations: What's Been the Blockage"
Op-Ed, The Huffington Post
By Charles G. Cogan, Associate, International Security Program
"Suspicion on both sides — Iranian and American — is extremely high. Iranian fear of American-sponsored regime change may seem unrealistic in today's world, but the fact is that Iran was the victim of an American regime change back in 1953."
AP Images
December 10, 2012
"The Coming Clash Over Iran"
Op-Ed, National Interest
By Graham Allison, Director, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Douglas Dillon Professor of Government, Harvard Kennedy School and Shai Feldman, Member of the Board, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Graham Allison and Shai Feldman write that while the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government were largely on the same page during the Gaza crisis, "much greater turbulence in their relations can be expected by the middle of next year when the issues associated with Iran’s nuclear project will likely reach another crescendo."
December 6, 2012
"Refocus beyond Benghazi"
Op-Ed, Boston Globe
By Nicholas Burns, Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Politics, Harvard Kennedy School
Republicans continue to question this week about what UN Ambassador Susan Rice knew and when she knew it on Benghazi. A real debate would focus on what we must do to reinforce security at our embassies and consulates rather than argue over who said what in the days following the attacks. What Congress should also focus on are the increasingly serious challenges confronting us in the ever-volatile Middle East.
