United States Institute of Peace

The Iran Primer

New Articles

U.S.-Iranian Competition in the Middle East

            The Arab uprisings shattered the conventional military balance between Iran and the United States in the Middle East, according to an updated report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The two countries have since strengthened relationships with both state and non-state actors to “project power and shape the broader regional balance of power.” Syria, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan are key arenas of strategic competition. The following are excerpts from the report, with a link to the full text at the end.

            The Islamic Republic has developed strong ties with Syria and non-state actors in the region, including the Lebanese Shi'a group Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas Islamist movement, in what Iranian and Syrian leaders have dubbed the "Resistance Axis." Iran continues to exploit Arab-Israeli tensions in ways that make it an active barrier to a lasting Arab-Israeli peace, while the US must deal with Arab hostility to its strategic partnership with Israel. At the same time, both the US and Iran face new uncertainties in dealing with Egypt, Syria, and the wave of unrest in the Arab world.
 
           At the same time, both the US and Iran face an unprecedented level of policy instability in the Levant, and the rest of the Middle East and North Africa, that affects every aspect of their regional competition. At present, no one can predict the outcome in any given case. Even the short term impact of changes in regimes is not predictable, nor is how they will affect the underlying drivers of regional tensions. It is particularly dangerous to ignore the risk of replacing one form of failed governance with another one, and the prospect of years of further political instability or upheavals.   
 
           Syria has been a challenge for US policy-makers for decades. Yet the current round of instability, an increasingly corrosive and sectarian civil war and the growing role of jihadi and militant Islamist groups are unprecedented. While the US may be poised to grant the Syrian opposition with formal recognition, Washington is less likely to enact a coherent strategy in the short term. This in turn informs the future pace and form of competition with Iran over Syria.
 
           Lebanon has been relatively stable during the current period of upheaval, however, local Sunni-Shiite competition mirrors and overlaps with broader regional competition between Sunni Arab states and Iran. As Syria's civil war deepens there are real risks of instability further spillover effects. However, there are also opportunities to manage security politics in the Levant that the US should not ignore.
    
           The place and role of the Palestinians in US policy and competition with Iran are also part and parcel of US-Iranian competition over Israel. While differences remains between the US and Fatah about the best approaches to achieve Palestinian statehood, the core challenge the US will face remains in dealing with an ascendant Hamas and the possibility the group could make further gains politically in the years ahead. How the US recalibrates or adapts to this will either benefit or undermine Iranian influence among the Palestinians.
 
           Lastly, US policy towards Egypt and Jordan are driven by a number of common factors that have impacted whether or not these two key US allies become exposed to Iranian influence and interference. Patterns of regional instability are likely to last for years and Syria's civil war will undermine the stability of peripheral states, including Jordan. The US must continue to work with regional allies - especially states within the Gulf Cooperation Council - to stave off the socio-economic and political effects of instability on both Egypt and Jordan.

Click here for Part I, “The Military and Asymmetric Dimensions of Regional Instability"

Click here for Part II, “The Proxy Way in Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories and Syria” 

Read Anthony H. Cordesman's chapter on Iran's conventional military in “The Iran Primer” 

U.S. Intelligence: Iran Key to Future Mideast Stability

            Iran’s potential decision to build a nuclear weapon may be the key variable in the future stability of the Middle East, according to a new report by the U.S. National Intelligence Council. “Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds” predicts that Tehran’s decision to build a nuclear weapon or retain the capability to develop one would trigger a dangerous arms race in the region. Saudi Arabia and Turkey would likely start their own nuclear programs. Sunni-Shiite and Arab-Persian tensions could easily spillover.

            But there is also a chance that a future Iranian government would cooperate with the United Nations on its nuclear program. A more liberal and democratic Iran would likely help to stabilize the region. The following are excerpts from the report’s projections on Iran.
 
            The future of nuclear proliferation hinges on the outcome of North Korean and Iranian efforts to develop nuclear weapons. Iran’s success, especially, could trigger an arms race in the Middle East, undermining the nonproliferation regime. On the other hand, if the international community prevails in its efforts to stop both of them, multilateral cooperation would be bolstered and the Non-Proliferation Treaty strengthened. Similarly, use of nuclear weapons by state or nonstate actors could either encourage or discourage proliferation depending on how events unfolded…
 
            Fledgling democracies have a higher risk of backsliding and instability. Endemic rivalries— such as between Iran and its neighbors—would be inflamed if Iran decided to develop nuclear weapons. Many of these conflicts, once begun, would not be easily containable and would have global impacts. The increasing empowerment of nonstate actors, such as Hizballah, in the region has the potential to further escalate any conflicts…
 
STATES MANAGING TERRORISM
            Many states might continue to use terrorist groups: states choose to exploit terrorist movements out of a strong sense of insecurity. States such as Pakistan and Iran feel threatened by what they perceive as stronger, threatening powers in their regions or globally. Therefore, they seek asymmetric options to assert power and deter attack; using terrorist groups as proxies and pursuing nuclear weapons are two such asymmetric tools. However, international disapproval of state support for terrorist movements has increased significantly, and the costs to a regime of directly supporting terrorists looks set to become even greater as international cooperation increases.
 
THE MIDDLE EAST : AT A TIPPING POINT
            The future of the Middle East hinges primarily on political developments in the region. If the Islamic Republic maintains power in Iran and is able to acquire nuclear weapons, the Middle East will face a highly unstable future. The collapse of the House of Saud could wreak havoc on the region’s economy, and the emergence of a radical Islamist government in Egypt could exacerbate regional tensions on a variety of fronts. Fragmentation along ethnic and religious lines in Iraq and Syria could lead to an unraveling of current borders. On the other hand, the emergence of moderate, democratic governments in these countries, or a breakthrough agreement to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, could have enormously positive consequences…
 
            Resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would have dramatic consequences for the region over the next two decades. For Israel, a permanent resolution to the conflict could open the door to regional relationships unthinkable today. The end of Palestinian conflict would provide a strategic setback to Iran and its resistance camp and over time undermine public support for militant groups such as Hizballah and Hamas. Without some sort of resolution, Israel would be increasingly absorbed with trying to control a burgeoning Palestinian population with limited political rights and a restive Gaza next door…
 
How will Iran project regional power?
            Iran’s influence is linked to its nuclear aspirations. A number of our interlocutors believe that Iran will stop short of developing a nuclear weapon— but will retain the ability to develop such a weapon. In this scenario, a breakdown of the nonproliferation system would be inevitable, with Saudi Arabia obtaining nuclear weapons or capabilities from Pakistan. Turkey might react to a nuclear Iran by seeking its own nuclear capability or relying instead on the NATO defensive shield. The UAE, Egypt, and possibly Jordan almost certainly would begin nuclear programs in the energy field as hedges that enabled them to go forward if Iran, Saudi Arabia, or others in the region became overt nuclear powers. If this occurred, the region would be in constant crisis. Sunni-Shia and Arab-Persian antagonisms would increase, spilling over to create far-reaching instability outside the region.
 
            A second scenario would involve the Iranian regime coming under growing pressure from its public, which could desire economic gains rather than nuclear weapons, and might not want to pay the price in terms of international isolation. Eventually, the regime could be toppled by elite infighting and mass demonstrations. Under this scenario in which Tehran focused more on economic modernization, a more pro-Western, democratic Iran—and a more stable region—would emerge…
 
            There appears to be no end in sight to the Sunni-Shia tensions. Saudi Arabia and Iran—both hit by lower energy prices because of the global growth slowdown—have nevertheless increased tensions by launching a proxy war in Syria and Lebanon. Hizballah has also launched its first large-scale cyber attack against Israel and the United States.

<!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <![endif]-->

Click here for the full text.


 

U.S. Ready for Negotiations but Time is Short

            On December 8, Deputy Secretary of State William J. Burns said that the United States is ready for negotiations if Iran is “serious about meeting its international obligations” on its nuclear program. He spoke at the Manama Dialogue, a regional security summit convened by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Government officials, businesspeople, economists and strategic thinkers from across the world attended the dialogue. The following is an excerpt from Burns’ statement.

            First is security, and in particular meeting the urgent challenges posed by Iran’s reckless behavior across a wide front, and the related imperative of accelerating a transition to the new leadership which the Syrian people so deeply deserve. We share with the rest of the international community a profound concern about Iran’s continuing refusal to meet its nuclear obligations, and a profound commitment to intensifying economic and political pressure until it does – pressure which has already resulted in a fifty percent drop in the value of Iran’s currency and a similar drop in oil exports. As Secretary Clinton made clear again last week, the United States is ready for a serious negotiation, along with our P5+1 partners, if Iran is serious about meeting its international obligations. But time for negotiation is growing short, given the worrisome pace of Iran’s nuclear program and mounting regional and international concerns. Meanwhile, beyond the nuclear issue, we see a continuing pattern of Iranian and Iranian-proxy threats around the world, from Bangkok to Bulgaria, and especially in this region. 
 
Click here for the full transcript
 

U.S. Renews Iran Sanctions Waivers

            On December 7, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the renewal of Iran sanctions exceptions for China, India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Taiwan. The nine countries will be able to continue buying reduced quantities of Iranian crude oil for the next 180 days without incurring U.S. penalties. Twenty countries have “continued to significantly reduce the volume of their crude oil purchases from Iran,” according to Clinton. The White House also issued a statement noting the efforts of countries to seek alternative suppliers. The following are the full statements by Secretary Clinton and the White House.

Statement by Secretary Clinton
 

            The United States and the international community remain committed to maintaining pressure on the Iranian regime until it fully addresses concerns about its nuclear program.  That’s why today I am pleased to announce that China, India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and Taiwan have again qualified for an exception to sanctions outlined in Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012, based on additional reductions in the volume of their crude oil purchases from Iran.  As a result, I will report to the Congress that exceptions to sanctions pursuant to Section 1245 of the NDAA for certain transactions will apply to the financial institutions based in these countries for a potentially renewable period of 180 days.

            A total of 20 countries and economies have continued to significantly reduce the volume of their crude oil purchases from Iran.  According to the latest U.S. Energy Information Administration report to Congress, Iran’s oil production fell by one million barrels per day in September and October 2012, compared to the same period in 2011.  This has reduced Iran’s export volumes and oil revenues, which fund not only the nuclear program but its support for terror and destabilizing actions in the region.  The message to the Iranian regime from the international community is clear:  take concrete actions to satisfy the concerns of the international community through negotiations with the P5+1, or face increasing isolation and pressure.
 

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 1245(d)(4)(B) and (C) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012

            Today the President made the determination required under Section 1245(d)(4)(B) and (C) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 regarding the supply of petroleum and petroleum products from countries other than Iran.
 
            The analysis contained in the Energy Information Administration’s report of October 25, 2012, indicates that although production disruptions continue to remove some oil from the market and the international response to concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities may have increased demand for non-Iranian crude oil, production increases in other countries and weaker demand growth overall have mitigated oil market tightness to a degree.  
 
            There currently appears to be sufficient supply of non-Iranian oil to permit foreign countries to significantly reduce their import of Iranian oil, taking into account current estimates of demand, increased production by countries other than Iran, inventories of crude oil and petroleum products, and available strategic petroleum reserves.  In this context, it is notable that many purchasers of Iranian crude oil have reduced their purchases or announced they are in productive discussions with alternative suppliers.  

 

U.S. Issues Iran Travel Warning

            On December 7, the State Department warned that U.S. citizens may be subject to “harassment or arrest while traveling or residing in Iran.” Dual national Iranian-Americans could face additional obstacles because Tehran does not recognize their American citizenship. The following is an excerpt from the travel warning.

            The Department of State warns U.S. citizens to carefully consider the risks of travel to Iran.  Dual national Iranian-American citizens may encounter difficulty in departing Iran.  U.S. citizens should stay current with media coverage of local events and carefully consider nonessential travel.  This replaces the Travel Warning for Iran issued April 27, 2012 to add additional contact information for the U.S. Interests Section in Tehran.

            Some elements in Iran remain hostile to the United States.  As a result, U.S. citizens may be subject to harassment or arrest while traveling or residing in Iran.  Since 2009, Iranian authorities have prevented the departure, in some cases for several months, of a number of Iranian-American citizens, including journalists and academics, who traveled to Iran for personal or professional reasons. Iranian authorities also have unjustly detained or imprisoned U.S. citizens on various charges, including espionage and posing a threat to national security.  U.S. citizens of Iranian origin should consider the risk of being targeted by authorities before planning travel to Iran.  Iranian authorities deny the U.S. Interests Section in Tehran access to imprisoned dual national Iranian-American citizens because Iranian authorities consider them to be solely Iranian citizens; access to U.S. citizens is often denied as well.
 
            The Iranian government continues to repress some minority religious and ethnic groups, including Baha'i, Arabs, Kurds, Azeris, and others.  Consequently, some areas within the country where these minorities reside, including the Baluchistan border area near Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Kurdish northwest of the country, and areas near the Iraqi border, remain unsafe. Iranian authorities have detained and harassed U.S. citizens of Iranian origin.  Former Muslims who have converted to other religions, as well as persons who encourage Muslims to convert, are subject to arrest and prosecution.
 

            The U.S. government does not have diplomatic or consular relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran and therefore cannot provide protection or routine consular services to U.S. citizens in Iran.  The Swiss government, acting through its Embassy in Tehran, serves as protecting power for U.S. interests in Iran.  The range of consular services provided by the U.S. Interests Section at the Swiss Embassy is limited and may require significantly more processing time than at U.S. Embassies or Consulates. The Iranian government does not recognize dual citizenship and will not allow the Swiss to provide protective services for U.S. citizens who are also Iranian nationals.

           

The Islamists Are Coming

The Islamists Are Coming, edited by Robin Wright, surveys the rise of Islamist groups in the wake of the Arab Spring. Often lumped together, the more than 50 Islamist parties with millions of followers now constitute a whole new spectrum—separate from either militants or secular parties. They will shape the new order in the world’s most volatile region more than any other political bloc. Yet they have diverse goals and different constituencies. Sometimes they are even rivals.

Connect With Us

Our Partners

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Logo