There may be a pause in hostilities, but a long-term settlement is still a long way off.
Articles on US-Iran conflict
Displaying 61 - 80 of 429 articles
The rest of the world has had to learn how to manage the US president’s mercurial temperament and unique style.
The Israeli prime minister faces an invidious choice in an election year: kowtow to a powerful ally, or risk displeasure at home by ending the war with Hezbollah.
Critics are calling the agreement a “complete capitulation” by the US.
The deal between US and Iran is the sign of a fast-changing world order.
This year the US president stayed until the end of the summit, unlike in 2025.
The Israeli prime minister has a long history of irritating American leaders.
There is nothing in the agreement that is positive for the US and did not already exist before the war.
Energy security has been front of mind for Asia-Pacific leaders this year. Australia could play a key role in assuring supply of both gas and clean exports.
The search for peace in the Middle East is putting a strain on relations between the two leaders.
Tens of thousands of people were arrested this year alone in Iran, and thousands are executed every year.
The US president is trying to shift the blame for his failures in Iran – and the Kurds are an easy scapegoat.
Iran has emerged with its uranium enrichment knowledge intact, its stockpile buried and fresh reason to believe that only a nuclear weapon would have deterred the US-Israel attack.
Tehran has exploited its asymmetric warfare capabilities to strengthen its position.
This agreement simply restores the pre-war status quo without resolving any of the underlying issues.
The deal will leave Iran in a stronger position than before the war, the US with far less leverage in the region, and Israel in the lurch.
A return to conflict simply would not have been in the interests of the US.
Escalating a conflict is paradoxically one way to end it. But this strategy can be flawed, particularly in a region like the Middle East.
The Middle East risks state of permanent confrontation where violence periodically erupts, diplomacy intervenes and neither changes the underlying reality.
Hundreds of millions of dollars are being made on well-timed oil bets occurring just before Trump posts. But can we call it insider trading?
Top contributors
-
Honorary Research Fellow, Department of International Politics, City St George's, University of London
-
Professor in International Politics, City St George's, University of London
-
Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, Australian National University; The University of Western Australia; Victoria University
-
Associate Professor in International Relations, UNSW
-
Lecturer in History and International Studies, Leiden University
-
Adjunct Professor, Defence and Security Institute, The University of Western Australia; UNSW
-
Associate Professor in International Politics, UCL
-
Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham
-
Lecturer in Energy Systems, University of Oxford
-
Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
-
Professor of International Relations, Lancaster University
-
Professor of the Practice of Political Science and International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
-
Lecturer, Department of War Studies, King's College London
-
Associate Professor, Defence Studies Department, King's College London
-
Fellow for the Middle East at the Baker Institute, Rice University