All Policy Analysis by James Jeffrey

If realist opponents of the Iran agreement insist that the JCPOA must go, they will need to explain in detail how the limited alternatives at Washington's disposal are worth the profound risks of killing the current deal.

Since the announcement of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), members of The Washington Institute’s Iran Study Group have met to assess the agreement’s relationship to the parameters outlined in the study group’s June 24 policy statement. Members of the study group have also benefited from several hours of

The following item appeared in the "Letters to the Editor" section of the Washington Post on July 21 . As a critic of many administration decisions on Iran, I have sympathy for Eric Edelman's and Ray Takeyh's problems with the Iran deal but disagree with their suggested response: Congress kills

The final agreement lies somewhere in between the April 2 interim parameters and Khamenei's maximalist demands, but whether Iran will adhere to the seemingly favorable terms is another question.

Nothing, including reluctantly accepting a bad agreement, is as dangerous as leaving open the question of how the United States would react if Iran approaches a nuclear weapons capability.

The Obama administration appears to be walking back from a full accounting of Tehran's nuclear weaponization efforts, leaving ample room for further clandestine research and weakening a central pillar of the global nonproliferation regime.

Any agreement should be judged not only by its verifiable nuclear restraints, but also by the credibility of U.S. readiness to contain the regime's asymmetrical military, ideological, religious, economic, and diplomatic moves in the region.

The blame game appears so blatant that one might even conclude the administration is intent on throwing in the towel against ISIS.

The Middle East state system is under relentless pressure, and preserving it will require a long-term vision for shoring up U.S. allies, rolling back ISIL, and countering the Iranians.

To ensure a successful summit with GCC leaders, the administration needs to make clear that its one-sided, 'transformational' approach to Cuba will not be repeated with the Iran nuclear deal.

The United States needs to take action to prevent the collapse of the state system in the Middle East and counter the rising influence of both Sunni and Shiite extremists, argues a new strategy report from The Washington Institute. Given the vital role that partnership with Sunni Arab states and

Given Iran's hegemonic history under the Safavids, the Shah, and the mullahs alike, Washington should not expect the regime to compromise its principles any time soon.

U.S. airpower, regular Iraqi troops, and local fighters constitute the model for rolling back ISIS in Anbar and Mosul.