Policy Analysis

In this excerpt from his new book on Hezbollah, Matthew Levitt discusses how destabilizing activities in Syria and ongoing money problems have hurt the group.

Despite its longstanding reputation as a pro-extremist faction, Tunisia's governing an-Nahda party may finally be breaking with the radical fringe.

Israelis are debating how potential Syria strikes would affect the prospects of U.S. action in Iran.

On August 28, 2013, the International Atomic Energy Agency released its latest reports on Iran and Syria. The Iran report assesses the status of the regime's nuclear activities and the agency's efforts to implement a safeguards agreement. The Syria report discusses the alleged nuclear site at Dair Alzour, destroyed by

In this excerpt from his new book on Hezbollah, Matthew Levitt explains how the group procured equipment in Canada and the United States.

If Tehran continues its unwavering support for the Syrian regime, it could dash President Rouhani's hopes of reducing Western pressure on Iran.

In his August 21 op-ed "It's Time to Choose Sides in Egypt," John Bolton argues that the recent "closure" of American embassies in the Middle East signals that the U.S. cannot protect its citizens abroad. This is not correct. In fact, "closed" means nothing more than "closed to the public"

Sending clear signals using punitive airstrikes is difficult but not impossible, and learning lessons from past operations can help maximize the chances of success if Washington decides to strike Syria.

The war in Syria has exposed the group's true strategic interests, which it has sought to secure through heavy involvement in the fighting.

Hezbollah plots in Europe over the past year exposed a return to violent operations being conducted by the Iranian-supported Lebanese Shiite group. Plots in Bulgaria and Cyprus led to a rigorous debate among European Union member states over whether or not to ban the organization’s military wing. But this only

As Washington considers military action in Syria, the temptation will be to pursue a limited punitive response to regime chemical-weapons use, rather than a campaign to achieve the administration's stated goal of Bashar al-Assad's removal. Giving in to that temptation would be a mistake.

If Washington and its allies decide to strike the Syrian regime in response to last week's chemical attack, they should strike hard, with the aim of achieving significant political and military effects.

Veteran U.S. peace negotiator and Institute Counselor Dennis Ross offers suggestions for changes to Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, including increased public outreach and a reordering of priorities. Watch a video FAQ in which Ambassador Ross tackles the key questions to emerge from the first round of talks.

There is ample justification for intervention in Syria once U.S. strategic interests are factored into the equation, regardless of the chemical red line.

The regime's cadres have held together through two years of war, and they will likely continue doing so unless Washington and its allies present them with a stark choice: leave and live, or stay and die.

Published in conjunction with PolicyWatch 2122, this graphic depicts the hierarchical structure of the Syrian regime.

The chemical weapons massacre in Damascus has mobilized Assad's foreign opponents, giving the United States a new reason and new partners for a more serious response.

The United States has serious business to do with Turkey, all of which remains doable despite the troublesome verdicts against top military officials.

Given the administration's reluctance to act in Syria and other hotspots, President Obama is wise not to diminish US influence further by cutting ties with the Egyptian military.

If the regime wins, as seems increasingly likely, post-war Syria will be a more brutal and anarchic place than ever before.