Policy Analysis

The Iraqi "resistance" is using language that previously presaged attacks on U.S. targets, whether sincerely or as a supportive bluff amid the latest Hamas-Israel crisis.

In its scope, depravity, and national reach, the Hamas assault was a much greater shock to Israelis, and their response should be viewed through that lens.

The group’s latest actions indicate that its strategy for the Gaza war has not changed: using limited and deniable border escalation to distract Israel without fully entering the conflict (for now).

Iraq's "resistance" militias all rhetorically supported the attack on Israel, but with interesting differences: Badr threatened Americans, while others seemed to downplay potential involvement.

The United States must underscore the risks that such action would incur and incentivize Tehran to rein in its proxies and partners.

Veteran U.S., Palestinian, and Israeli experts and policy practitioners explore the broader strategic repercussions of the unfolding war, as well as the factors that enabled Hamas to reach its current level of malign regional influence.

The differences and parallels between urban battlefield circumstances in Gaza, Iraq, and Syria give U.S. policymakers a sobering but clear view of what exactly they will be committing to in supporting Israel’s ground campaign.

The depth of the president’s commitment greatly impressed Israelis, though a protracted Gaza war could test sentiments on both sides.

The October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel represent a turning point that should bring home oft-overlooked realities about the Middle East and compel U.S. policymakers to rethink preconceptions about the region and America's role and interests in it.

A closer look at the political and security dilemmas that Arab leaders will face as the Hamas-Israel war intensifies.

The Biden administration views its defense support to Israel as sufficient at the current level of hostilities, but that may change as the war progresses and, potentially, expands.

The group might be content with its existing political gains from the conflict, but Washington should still try to shift its calculus given the grave risks of a wider war.

New Golan attacks and deployments by Iran-sponsored militias and Syrian forces are creating a worrisome distraction as Israel deals with the crisis on its southern front.

At least forty-four nations have condemned Hamas and decried its tactics as terrorism, but regional players such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Syria, and Iraq have pinned responsibility on Israel.

The long-suffering residents of Gaza deserve a better future, but getting there will require the international community to demilitarize Gaza after the war and disarm whatever is left of Hamas.

Despite the completely surprising nature of the attack, Hamas did in fact give multiple signals that a major operation was in the works.

Recent Washington Institute polls have tracked Gazans’ views on Hamas and the ceasefire with Israel, along with a wider regional decline in popularity for Hamas and Hezbollah.

Although the existential nature of the nuclear threat understandably demanded attention, Hamas and other Iranian proxies have dramatically increased their capabilities in the meantime.

An in-depth look at how regional states have responded to Putin's invasion of Ukraine—by their actions as much as their words.

As Morocco rebuilds the High Atlas Mountains, understanding the region’s complex history and challenges is key for building a future for the region.