Buscador avanzado

‘Donald Trump has consistently increased tensions and courted confrontation with Iran.’ Iranians burn a US flag in Tehran on Friday. Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA

The Trump administration’s assassination on Thursday of General Qassem Suleimani could turn out to be its biggest foreign policy blunder. The killing could lead to a war with Iranian proxies across the Middle East, belying Trump’s supposed desire to extricate the US from its endless conflicts. But its most likely immediate effect will be to ratchet up pressure on the Iraqi government to expel US troops from Iraq. And that would mean Iran extending its already substantial influence over Iraqi government and society.

The Trump administration was quick to portray the assassination as a pre-emptive strike, saying Suleimani had been “actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region.”…  Seguir leyendo »

The conflict in Yemen is intensifying. The U.S. Navy launched cruise missiles at radar sites in areas controlled by Iran-backed Houthi forces in retaliation for attempted missile strikes on U.S. vessels, and Iran reportedly sent warships to the waters off Yemen. The moves risked bringing Iran into direct confrontation with the United States and Saudi Arabia, its ally. But while Iran will not skip an opportunity to poke its regional rival in the eye, Tehran does not want overt confrontation with the United States in Yemen.

The U.S. action came after two of its ships came under two separate missile attacks near the Bab al-Mandab straits.…  Seguir leyendo »

Effective enforcement of the Iranian nuclear deal remains a conundrum. Enshrined in the agreement is “snapback” – the restoration of international economic sanctions against Tehran should it violate the deal’s terms. Yet the expected rush of European, Russian and Chinese businesses into Iran would make such unified action questionable.

Aware that economic pressure might not be enough, U.S. officials have repeatedly declared “all options” are on the table. Though most have been reluctant to offer details, recent Pentagon talk has focused on a new bunker-buster bomb. Such talk feeds into the growing presumption that Washington would rely on air strikes if Iran violated the agreement.…  Seguir leyendo »

The Obama administration’s drive to achieve any type of agreement with Iran on the nuclear weapons program defies logic. President Obama and his team argue that while the agreement may not be perfect, the alternative is war.

It obviously will come as a surprise to the Obama administration that Iran has been at war with the United States for more than 35 years. This has led to the loss of thousands of American lives. Every administration, be it Democrat or Republican, has failed to counter Iran’s acts of war, starting with the Carter administration, when Iranians took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.…  Seguir leyendo »

President Obama's decision to target militants from ISIS -- which is now calling itself the "Islamic State" or "IS" -- operating in Iraq comes as a huge relief to the Iranians. Officials in Tehran have been panic stricken since ISIS forces overran the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on June 10.

All political factions in Tehran would like to see ISIS suffer and its latest advances rolled back. At the same time, contradictory statements made in Tehran make it clear that the Iranian authorities are divided about the implications of the American military's return to Iraq.

The moderates, the group of people associated with President Hassan Rouhani's presidential administration, are nudging toward an open admission that American military operations in Iraq compliment Tehran's policy goals.…  Seguir leyendo »

An Arab proverb advises, “A problem is solved when it gets tougher.”

Illustrating that point, the advance in Iraq and Syria of the Islamic State poses a threat to the United States while clarifying choices for U.S. policymakers. The question confronting the United States and Iran is no longer whether to work together but how to do so. And in light of decades of distrust and animosity, communications between the two countries can be greatly facilitated by reaching a comprehensive nuclear agreement in talks underway in Vienna. Failure, however, would leave only bad options.

If the Islamic State is to be contained, the United States and other nations will have to reconsider past policies and manage enmities.…  Seguir leyendo »

As the terrorist group the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) continues to capture and control more territory in Iraq and Syria, it is important to realize what is at stake in the region and for the American people.

The challenge that ISIS poses is not just to Iraq's stability but also to U.S. security. ISIS is a terrorist group with their own army and bank account that has a clear and growing ability to conduct terrorist attacks against the Iraqi government, Americans and U.S. interests, and even the U.S. homeland.

ISIS, although loosely affiliated with al Qaeda, is in many respects even more extreme in its methods and its brutality than the terrorists who plotted and carried out 9/11.…  Seguir leyendo »

America and Iran Can Save Iraq

To save Iraq from Sunni extremists, Iran is mobilizing its allies in Iraq and promoting collaboration between Iraq’s government and Syria. Washington, meanwhile, has dispatched military advisers to Baghdad. On their own, these efforts are valiant. But without coordination, they won’t be fruitful.

Iraq was until recently a battleground between Iran and the United States. A string of American military commanders battled Gen. Qassim Suleimani, head of foreign operations for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards, for influence. At the height of the American occupation, Iran’s handful of men in Iraq wielded more power than the 150,000 American forces stationed there.

Despite their largely adversarial past, the two countries can now save Iraq if they act together.…  Seguir leyendo »

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani speaks during a press conference in Tehran, Iran, Saturday, June 14, 2014. (Vahid Salemi/AP)

The growing disaster in Iraq has triggered anguished debate over two fundamental questions: What went wrong? And what do we do about it?

Surprisingly, many people who disagree vehemently about the former question (in particular, whether President George W. Bush or President Obama is more to blame) agree on the latter. Thus Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who has consistently attacked the Obama administration for its foreign policy, suggests that the United States should work with Iran to counter the rapid advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). That idea was also advanced by Secretary of State John F.…  Seguir leyendo »

La perspectiva de un ataque militar de los EE.UU. a Siria se ha debilitado a raíz de la aceptación por el Presidente Obama de una iniciativa internacional para controlar el arsenal de armas químicas de Siria. El giro de 180 grados habido en el último momento en las presiones en pro de la acción militar se ha producido sobre un fondo de intensificación de la presión diplomática por parte de la comunidad internacional para evitar la escalada de la violencia en Siria y ese resultado no es posible sin el Irán.

En una conferencia de prensa conjunta con su homólogo sirio, Walid Al Moallem, el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores de Rusia, Sergey Lavrov, presentó una propuesta, originalmente acordada con el Irán, en la que se pedía que Siria “ponga sus almacenes de armas químicas bajo control internacional”.…  Seguir leyendo »

The Arab Awakening has caused a crisis in the Middle East that will take years to sort out. There is one Middle East crisis, however, that must be resolved in months, not years.

Every American committed to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon should urge Congress to grant President Obama authority to use military force against the Assad regime in Syria.

The inauguration of Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s new president, offers some hope of a diplomatic settlement that eliminates the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. But Rouhani will need the approval of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who has made confrontation with the United States the centerpiece of his rule.…  Seguir leyendo »

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington has provoked a broad debate over the military and political wisdom of an attack on Iran. But so far, there has been little attention to the legal issues involved, which are crucial. American support for a preemptive strike would be a violation of both international law and the U.S. Constitution.

Article II of the Constitution requires the president to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed," and Article VI says that treaties are part of the "supreme law of the land." Since the Senate overwhelmingly ratified the United Nations Charter as a treaty in 1945, the president is constitutionally required to abide by Article 51 of the charter.…  Seguir leyendo »

Barack Obama recibió de su predecesor, George W. Bush, una herencia bélica envenenada. Aunque distinguiera entre Irak como una guerra "elegida" y Afganistán como una guerra "necesaria", en ambos casos prometió la retirada.

La primera retirada ya ha tenido lugar, y seguramente ha sido mucho más honrosa de lo que Obama jamás pudo imaginar. La retirada de Irak no salva el desastre que fue la invasión ni convalida la pérdida consiguiente de vidas, como tampoco deja detrás una democracia estable, pero permite pasar una difícil página, reducir costes presupuestarios en época de crisis y, sobre todo, permitir a la Administración de Obama centrarse en su verdadero objetivo estratégico: Asia-Pacífico.…  Seguir leyendo »