Trump Must Exclude E3 from U.S.-Iran Talks

Popular analyses claim Iran is “weaker than it has even been since the Islamic Revolution” and the “fabled” Axis of Resistance has been badly damaged. Time is ripe for U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran. Others, building on these pedestrian analyses, claim Iran is desperate for a nuclear deal and sanctions relief. But while Iran does need relief, Israel and U.S. need an accommodation with Iran because they cannot defeat Iran militarily. E3 must be excluded from negotiations with Iran because it will derail talks. U.S. and Iran must talk directly.

Is Trump really ready to negotiate with Iran?

“Trump’s exploratory outreach to Iran, presented as a clean slate, stands in stark contrast to the turbulence of his hawkish first term. Is this a sincere effort at diplomacy or a calculated salvo to throw his opponents off guard?” My essay, published by Cradle Media, can be accessed at the link published on my site. For copyright reasons, I cannot post the full text. Thanks.

Afghan Follies

Installation of a new administration should be occasion for evaluation of foreign policy and for adjustments, but Marco Rubio’s statements about the Taliban portend enhanced misery for 42 million Afghans suffering under the Islamic Emirate. Influence of Afghan émigré groups, viz., “National Resistance Front,” will prevent the Trump Administration from forging a diplomatic path to Kabul that enhances U.S. National Security.

Iran’s Assad Calculus: Actual Costs of Support vs Benefits to Iran

The fall of the House of Assad is not a debacle for Iran nor the death knell for the Axis of Resistance. Hizballah will thrive despite the fall of Assad, who was not pulling his weight. Iran appears to have conducted a cost-benefit analysis and determined that the financial and human costs of remaining in Syria and underwriting the Assad regime outweighed strategic and military benefits. Most relationships have inherent timers; the Assad-Iran marriage was ready for dissolution.