National Security

Is No Nuclear Deal With Iran a Better Outcome for Obama?

I still think the odds favor a deal, soon, on the Iran nuclear issue. But as negotiations have continued, and in light of Iranian demands to eliminate the U.N. arms embargo, including restrictions on its ballistic missile technology, there are reasons that Barack Obama might now feel that no deal would better serve his interests. Consider the advantages if the president were to view time as an ally, not an adversary:

CANCELLED: The Iran Negotiations: Is this Really the End Game?

Iran and six major powers will keep negotiating past Tuesday's deadline for a long-term nuclear agreement. We will postpone this event on Wednesday, July 8 until a deal is announced.

Despite the uncertainties, the United States and Iran seem to be in the final stages of what promises to be a comprehensive accord on the nuclear issue. 

What If No Agreement Is Reached on Iran’s Nuclear Program?

President Barack Obama threatened Tuesday to walk away from nuclear negotiations if Iran doesn’t adhere to the principles it agreed to in April. Negotiators have formally extended talks to July 7 to give themselves additional time to conclude an agreement. I’m still betting on a deal in July. But what if there is no deal?

Let’s step back from the politics and the talking points.

The Hillary Doctrine: Sex & American Foreign Policy (Book Launch)

When Valerie Hudson evaluates the strength of a nation, whether food security, wealth, peacefulness, or quality of governance, she finds one important thread that underlies it all. “One of the most important factors in the determination of these things is in fact the situation, and security, and status of women,” said Hudson at the Wilson Center on June 24.

No, the Iran Nuclear Deal Will Not Be Good for the U.S.

Iran will get too much.

Once Iran learned how to make a nuke, there wasn’t much chance for a really good and reassuring deal on the nuclear issue. The agreement being negotiated now may well be the least bad of the terrible options available to slow Iran’s nuclear program. But we should be clear-eyed about what else we may be getting from this deal: a richer and stronger Iran, one pushing for a Middle East more hostile to the U.S.–and one that will still retain the capacity to build nuclear weapons.

Immigration: Transforming America

In the final installment of our recap of the Wilson Center May 2015 Alumni Conference, an expert panel explores the ongoing ways that immigration is transforming America.  That’s the focus of this edition of REWIND.

Part 1, a REWIND recap of a conversation between Madeleine Albright and Jane Harman, can be found here:  

A New Foreign Policy for America

In an era of new and emerging global threats, Senator Chris Murphy believes there is an urgent need to refocus the traditional debate between isolationism and military interventionism. Join us as Senator Murphy outlines the eight principles for a new foreign policy vision that seeks to maintain U.S. global leadership but looks beyond our traditional military toolkit for engaging the world.

U.S.-China Relations and Regional Order

U.S.-China Relations and Regional Order was presented as the keynote address at Blurring Borders: National, Subnational, and Regional Orders in East Asia on June 1, 2015. The webcast of the event can be viewed here. A PDF version is available for download below.  

Hold the Obituary: Is the U.S. Really in Decline?

In the second installment of our recap of the Wilson Center May 2015 Alumni Conference, we hear from an a-list panel of analysts addressing the question, “Is the U.S. in decline?” From the China challenge to the “rise of the rest,” America’s place in the world is being questioned from within and without. Is the American Century truly over and are its best days in history’s rear view mirror? That’s the focus of this edition of REWIND.

How Supplying Sunni Tribes Could Backfire on the U.S.

The possibility that the Obama administration is considering supplying military assistance directly to Sunni tribes in Anbar underscores a central challenge in Washington’s approach to Iraq,  Syria, and the Middle East generally. I call it the “one person’s floor is another person’s ceiling” problem.

Pages