Number of results to display per page
Search Results
1062. ISRAELI-AZERBAIJANI ALLIANCE AND IRAN
- Author:
- Mahir Khalifa-Zadeh
- Publication Date:
- 12-2012
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Middle East Review of International Affairs
- Institution:
- Global Research in International Affairs Center, Interdisciplinary Center
- Abstract:
- This article discusses cooperation between Israel and the Republic of Azerbaijan in order to neutralize foreign threats and ensure regional security. Expanding and improving ties with Azerbaijan has been part of Israel's newly adopted strategy toward non-Arab Muslim states. Also addressed is Iran's attitude towards Azerbaijan and the political and ideological opposition between the two mainly Shi'a-populated countries. Highlighted is the cooperation's strategic importance for improving security and defense capabilities for both Israel and Azerbaijan. Last, U.S. priorities in the South Caucasus are viewed in the context of the Israeli-Azerbaijani alliance.
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iran, Israel, and Azerbaijan
1063. Iran's Presence in Iraq: New Realities?
- Author:
- Mahjoob Zweiri
- Publication Date:
- 06-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic Studies (CSS)
- Abstract:
- This study explores the new realties related to the Iran’s presence in Iraq. It focuses on Iran’s grand strategy in Iraq, and Iran’s decision-making process concerning that presence. The study discusses different methods that Iran has used to achieve its goals in Iraq. It also discusses in-depth the four Iranian levels of intervention in Iraq, and the consequences on the region. The study includes supporting data, which help to understand the nature of Iranian intervention in Iraq.
- Topic:
- Geopolitics, Grand Strategy, Foreign Interference, and Decision-Making
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
1064. Iran’s Nuclear Program: A Case Study in Successful U.S.-Japan Alliance Management
- Author:
- Vance Serchuk
- Publication Date:
- 04-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Project 2049 Institute
- Abstract:
- Speaking at Suntory Hall in Tokyo during his inaugural visit to the Asia-Pacific region as President of the United States, Barack Obama in November 2009 affirmed his Administration’s commitment to “an enduring and revitalized alliance between the United States and Japan.” Noting the impending 60th anniversary of the alliance, President Obama pledged to “deepen” the ties between Washington and Tokyo as a cornerstone of a broader strategy of reengagement with the region. At the same time, Obama cast the U.S.-Japan alliance in global terms, noting Japan’s “important contributions to stability around the world—from reconstruction to Iraq, to combating piracy off the Horn of Africa, to assistance for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Nuclear Weapons, and Alliance
- Political Geography:
- Japan, Iran, Middle East, Asia, and United States of America
1065. What a Tangled Web: India Caught Between U.S. and Iranian Interests
- Author:
- Felix Imonti
- Publication Date:
- 06-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Abstract:
- India is caught between the consequences of provoking a United States driven by its fixation upon the Iranian nuclear program and by an Iran that is a major supplier of oil, providing India with access to its vital interests in Afghanistan. The best that the Ind
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Nuclear Power
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, India, Asia, North America, and United States of America
1066. Congress Considers New Sanctions on Iran - But Why
- Author:
- Paul Nadeau
- Publication Date:
- 07-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Abstract:
- It is not surprising that Congress can take a more aggressive stance on foreign policy issues than the Executive: Congress rarely bears the loss in foreign policy mistakes (consider where foreign policy issues rank on voters’ lists of priorities) and that consequently gives Congress an opportunity to demonstrate leadership, since high profile issues in most other issue areas carry considerably more risk. The result is that Congress will often take a position that is contrary to that of the Executive, most frequently by adopting a more extreme position, and then either assailing the Executive for a lack of leadership when the Executive does not follow or by taking credit when the Executive adopts Congress’s position. The most recent example is the issue of Iran’s nuclear program—which is likely the only current issue where there is genuine bipartisan support, famously evidenced in the Senate’s December 2011 100-0 passage of legislation sanctioning Iran’s financial sector. So far, international sanctions, and particularly the European Union’s sanctions of Iran’s oil sector, seem to have succeeded in damaging Iran’s economy and possibly even encouraging them to negotiate, though a breakthrough has been elusive. The problem is that while the sanctions may have succeeded in crippling Iran’s (already weak) economy so far, the goal of the sanctions program is supposed to have been to convince Iran to terminate its nuclear program. On that score, it’s unclear that additional sanctions may help the American cause and it might even undermine it.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
1067. Understanding the IAEA’s Mandate in Iran: Avoiding Misinterpretations
- Author:
- David Albright, Olli Heinonen, and Orde Kittrie
- Publication Date:
- 11-2012
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Institute for Science and International Security
- Abstract:
- 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. Although arguments used by Iran and these academics to undermine the legitimacy of IAEA activities regarding Iran are patently false, they are nevertheless dangerous to both current and future nonproliferation efforts. Unless these arguments are clearly countered, and their fallaciousness clearly demonstrated for all the world to see, these arguments may decrease the chances of Iran agreeing to comply with its international legal obligations, could provide a fig leaf to those countries disinclined to hold Iran accountable, and might undercut the IAEA's and the United Nations Security Council's potentially pivotal roles in facilitating a peaceful resolution to disputes over the nuclear programs of Iran and future proliferators. It is in that light that we have chosen to address the dangerous claim published on September 13, 2012 by Daniel Joyner, a law professor at the University of Alabama, that the IAEA has exceeded its legal mandate in applying safeguards in Iran in accordance with a comprehensive safeguards agreement (CSA) under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In view of the importance of the IAEA's activities regarding Iran, the persistent efforts by Iran to call into question the legitimacy of those IAEA activities, and our concern to ensure that there is no misunderstanding as to the agency's mandates, we are writing to discuss those mandates and explain why Joyner is incorrect.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
1068. Middle East Security Report : Syria's Armed Opposition
- Author:
- Joseph Holliday
- Publication Date:
- 03-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for the Study of War
- Abstract:
- The rebels will have to rely on external lines of supply to replenish their arms and ammunition if they are to continue eroding the regime's control. The emergence of al-Qaeda-linked terrorist cells working against the regime poses risks to the United States and a challenge to those calling for material support of the armed opposition. As the militias continue to face overwhelming regime firepower the likelihood of their radicalization may increase. Moreover, the indigenous rebels may turn to al-Qaeda for high-end weaponry and spectacular tactics as the regime's escalation leaves the rebels with no proportionate response, as occurred in Iraq in 2005-2006. Developing relations with armed opposition leaders and recognizing specific rebel organizations may help to deter this dangerous trend. It is imperative that the United States distinguish between the expatriate political opposition and the armed opposition against the Assad regime on the ground in Syria. American objectives in Syria are to hasten the fall of the Assad regime; to contain the regional spillover generated by the ongoing conflict; and to gain influence over the state and armed forces that emerge in Assad's wake. Therefore, the United States must consider developing relations with critical elements of Syria's armed opposition movement in order to achieve shared objectives, and to manage the consequences should the Assad regime fall or the conflict protract.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Terrorism, and Armed Struggle
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Russia, United States, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Germany, and Syria
1069. The Resurgence of Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq
- Author:
- Sam Wyer
- Publication Date:
- 12-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Institute for the Study of War
- Abstract:
- This report examines the political, religious, and military resurgence of Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH) in Iraq since the withdrawal of U.S. Forces, identifying the group's key actors, their present disposition and strategy, and their regional expansion. AAH is an Iranian-backed Shi'a militant group that split from Moqtada al-Sadr's Jaish al-Mahdi (JAM) in 2006. Since that time, AAH has conducted thousands of lethal explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces, targeted kidnappings of Westerners, rocket and mortar attacks on the U.S. Embassy, the murder of American soldiers, and the assassination of Iraqi officials.
- Topic:
- Security, Islam, Terrorism, and Armed Struggle
- Political Geography:
- United States, Iraq, Iran, and Middle East
1070. Iran's Declining Influence in Iraq
- Author:
- Babak Rahimi
- Publication Date:
- 12-2012
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Washington Quarterly
- Institution:
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
- Abstract:
- ''Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies,'' was the provocative title of a pamphlet published in 1940 by Saddam Hussein's uncle, Khairallah Talfah. Saddam himself incorporated suchanti-Iranian sentiment into Ba'athist state ideology after his rise to power in 1979 and into the bloody 1980—1988 Iran—Iraq war. Such hostility is still visible today under the Victory Arch, popularly known as the Crossed Swords, in central Baghdad where thousands of the helmets of Iranian soldiers are held in nets, with some half buried in the ground. Before 2003, every year Saddam and his soldiers would proudly march over the helmets, as the symbol of Iraq's triumph over Persia.
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Iran, and Tehran