Michael Doran, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and the author of Ike’s Gamble: America’s Rise to Dominance in the Middle East (2016), is a former deputy assistant secretary of defense and a former senior director of the National Security Council. He tweets @doranimated.
As a strategic concept, defeating the Iranian-led order plays to America’s strengths, serves its vital interests, and is poised to attract the support of its traditional allies.
America needs to back up its allies (Israel, Saudi Arabia, and potentially Turkey), and isolate its adversaries (Iran, Russia, China, Islamic State). Everything else is secondary.
Professional study of Middle East history now belongs to incompetents and political agitators.
Old fashioned anti-Semitism played a role, but the greater part had to do with a fear, justified or not, of provoking the Arabs.
America needs to form as broad an international coalition against Tehran as possible—and simultaneously to develop a strategy for the Middle East as a whole.
The policies of the Obama administration led to carnage in Syria, regional chaos, and the rise of Iran and its alliance with Russia. Can the momentum be reversed—without going to war?
One of them learned from his mistakes, re-examined his fundamental assumptions, and changed course as necessary.
President Obama’s foreign policy failures—Iran, Syria, Russia—aren’t accidents. They’re rooted in flawed theories and misguided judgments.
Vladimir Putin’s major new role in the Middle East is no accident. It’s part and parcel of President Obama’s broader strategy.
Why has a ragtag force been able to hold out against the most powerful country in the world? Because America’s regional strategy is based on false precepts.
Those who think the Iranians outwitted us fail to recognize one very important thing: the White House never intended to contain Iran.
The new memoir by Michael Oren, Israel’s former ambassador to Washington, tells all—except for one thing.
The president’s address last week to Congregation Adas Israel as “an honorary member of the tribe” was something other than it seemed.
To the president, foreign policy isn’t just about safeguarding the country. It’s also, as the Iran deal makes clear, about fashioning a creative personal narrative of the effort.
A nuclear deal is only the beginning. The president’s goal, at the expense of America’s allies, is full-fledged détente with Iran.
Even his former adviser agrees that the president’s Iran policy is collapsing. Can anything be done, or is it too late?
The president has long been criticized for his lack of strategic vision. But what if a strategy, centered on Iran, has been in place from the start and consistently followed to this day?
How the president has exploited the international campaign against IS in order to accommodate Iran.
How America can help the new Arab-Israel alliance to resist IS and stabilize the Middle East.
. . . if he were caught between the rise of al-Qaeda and Iran and the decline of the United States?