IRAN -- NUCLEAR 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.
December 20, 2012
Op-Ed, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
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."
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.
December 14, 2012
Op-Ed, The Diplomat
"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...."
December 11, 2012
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."
December 10, 2012
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 2012–January 2013
Journal Article, Survival, issue 6, volume 54
By Chuck Freilich, Senior Fellow, International Security Program
"Although the unusual public nature and stridency of the debate struck many around the world, it is still hard for those abroad to understand how great the effect on the Israeli public has been. The Iranian nuclear programme had been the one consensual issue in an otherwise politically frenetic and deeply divided country and was dealt with, so the public believed, in a manner appropriate to the severity of the threat."
November 28, 2012
David Manning, former UK Ambassador to the US, spoke widely on his thoughts on many of the pressing issues that are facing international diplomats in the coming decade in a November 26th, 2012, lecture to Harvard Kennedy School students and faculty.
November 27, 2012
Much attention has focused on Iran's advancing nuclear program, on the peace and security concerns which that program has raised, and on the international policy debate over how to respond to that program. Far less attention has been paid to the various legal-sounding arguments used by Iran and a few academics to call into question the mandate of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to investigate and make determinations about actual or suspected violations of Iran’s legal obligations.
November 1, 2012
Op-Ed, Boston Globe
By Eliot A. Cohen, Eric S. Edelman, Senior Associate, International Security Program and Meghan L. O'Sullivan, Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of the Practice of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
"Because of the last four years, we face a world in which our enemies do not fear us, our friends do not believe they can trust us, and those who maneuver between the two camps feel that they will not get in trouble by crossing us. It is time, and more than time, to choose a different course."