Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

U.S. policy toward the Middle East has relied heavily on military instruments of power and has focused on regional threats—particularly the Iranian threat—with the goal of keeping partners on "our side." These long-standing policies have largely fallen short of meeting core U.S. interests and adapting to new regional realities and strategic imperatives. RAND researchers offer an alternative framework, suggesting that the U.S. strategic priority must center on reducing regional conflict and the drivers of conflict. This revised strategic approach puts a greater focus on addressing conflict and socioeconomic challenges that are creating unsustainable pressures on the region's states and immense suffering among its people. Researchers analyze how the tools of U.S. policy—political, security, economic, diplomatic, and informational instruments—would need to adjust to more effectively address such challenges in ways that are mindful of limited resources at home. Researchers also examine how the United States deals with both partners and adversaries in and outside the region and consider how to better leverage policies to the benefit of U.S. interests and the region. The researchers recommend specific actions organized into the following three pillars: (1) shifting resources from the current heavy reliance on military tools to a more balanced approach that prioritizes economic investments, governance, diplomacy, and programs focused on people; (2) favoring a long-term time horizon to reduce regional conflict and support growth and development, even at the cost of short-term risks; and (3) working multilaterally with global and regional partners to address key challenges.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

In this summary, researchers assess the advantages and trade-offs of a reimagined Middle East strategy where strategic goals link to a broader understanding of stability that prioritizes reduced conflict, better governance, and greater development. They analyze long-standing U.S. interests and relationships with partners and develop an alternative framework in which the challenge of Iran is one among several factors that should be considered.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Can the United States find ways to cooperate with China or Russia in Europe and the Middle East? Using official U.S., Chinese, and Russian policy documents, leadership statements, and other sources, the authors of this report assess the prospects for great power cooperation on seven issues: broader Euro-Atlantic security, Baltic security, Balkan security and strategic orientation, Turkey's regional role and strategic orientation, the future of Ukraine, Middle East stability and peace processes, and countering Iran and its proxies. The authors find that, in Europe, opportunities for cooperation on the core security challenges with either competitor are virtually absent, but there are opportunities to limit escalation or manage tensions. In the Middle East, more substantive opportunities for cooperation exist in principle — more with Russia than China, but some cooperative options exist even with the latter. However, in both regions, there are multiple obstacles that will likely preclude the United States from seizing the more ambitious of these opportunities in the near term. This research was completed in September 2020, before the February 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and before the U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021. It has not been subsequently revised.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

If there is a set of issues where great power cooperation could be most likely, it should be in the global commons. Global commons issues are — by definition — shared by multiple nations. As part of a broader study of great power cooperation in an era of strategic competition, the authors assessed the potential for U.S. cooperation with China or Russia on eight global commons issues: maintaining freedom of access to space, dismantling transnational criminal organizations/networks, countering violent extremist organizations, promoting global stability, preserving access to the air and maritime commons, preventing nuclear arms races, preventing militarization of the Arctic, and maintaining the openness of cyberspace. The authors sought to understand where the United States, China, and Russia share interests on these issues, what the obstacles to cooperation are, and where the United States might be able to deepen its cooperation with one or both powers. The authors find that the trade space for cooperation is already narrow and usually focused more on civilian aspects of these domains rather than core security matters. In general, there is more room for the United States to cooperate with Russia than with China, and there are significant obstacles to cooperation, with a lack of trust being the most common. Finally, cooperation produces both positive and negative externalities, and the costs of cooperation do not always outweigh the likely benefits.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

In recent years Iran has dramatically increased its investment in the Houthi movement, raising speculation that the Houthis will evolve into another regional proxy that serves to protect and promote Iranian interests. Iran has frequently turned to sponsor-proxy relationships to expand its reach in the Middle East and antagonize its adversaries while minimizing the risk of inviting direct conflict. The Houthis represent an attractive opportunity on both of these counts — giving Iran reach into Yemen and the adjacent Red Sea and providing Iran a means to harass its rival, Saudi Arabia. The authors document the results of a project analyzing the prospect that Iran will further invest in the Houthis and develop them into an enduring proxy group in Yemen. The authors focus on the history of the Houthi movement, its current relations with Iran, and possibilities for the future. To inform this analysis and better capture Iran's strategic calculus vis-à-vis the Houthis, the project also explores Iran's history of proxy development in three distinct contexts: Lebanon, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf. Lessons from these cases have informed the analysis of the trajectory of the Houthi-Iran relationship, and the authors pose scenarios for the future. The project's findings should be of interest to a wide-ranging audience in the foreign policy and defense community, and particularly those interested in proxy warfare and conflict dynamics in the Middle East. The analysis can help policymakers better understand Iranian motivations throughout the region, while offering clear signals and warnings of potential escalation in Yemen.