INSS Insight
President Trump’s Visit to the Gulf: A Shifting Regional Order and the Challenge for Israel
What are the outcomes of Trump’s diplomatic visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates—and how do they affect Israel?
19.05.25
Policy Papers
Between a Nuclear Arrangement and Military Strike in Iran—Toward a Decision
The talks that began in April 2025 between Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff—with Oman’s mediation—are bringing Iran, the United States, and Israel closer to critical moments regarding the future of Iran’s nuclear program. The results of the negotiations will largely determine whether the direction will be toward a political-diplomatic settlement on the nuclear issue or toward a military strike (Israeli, American, or joint) against Iran’s nuclear facilities. At this stage, it is clear that both the Iranian leadership, headed by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and the American administration, led by President Donald Trump, prefer a diplomatic solution over military confrontation, the outcomes and consequences of which are difficult to foresee.
However, in the absence of an agreement that blocks Iran’s path to nuclear weapons, and given a decision to resort to a military option, Israel must coordinate this with the United States—even if this does not guarantee active American participation in the strike. Coordination and cooperation with the United States are necessary for Israel to defend against an Iranian response, preserve achievements following the strike, and ensure American support in efforts to prevent the rehabilitation of Iran’s nuclear program—whether by kinetic military means, covert operations, or diplomatic measures.
In any case, it is essential to emphasize the need for a comprehensive campaign against Iran and not solely against its nuclear program. A joint American–Israeli strike could provide the optimal solution to the challenge, provided it is part of a broader campaign against the Islamic Republic and should be planned accordingly. At the end of such a campaign, a complementary diplomatic move must be led, ensuring the achievement of all strategic goals against Iran, including blocking its path to nuclear weapons, dismantling the pro-Iranian axis, and imposing limits on its missile project.
06.05.25
INSS Insight
The Nuclear Talks Between the United States and Iran—Chances for Reaching an Agreement and Implications for Israel
The gaps between Tehran and Washington have not yet narrowed significantly, but it seems that both sides are determined to reach an agreement and avoid a military escalation. How should Israel, which is on the sidelines of the talks, act in this situation?
05.05.25
Strategic update
US Military Involvement in the Campaign against the Islamic State under Presidents Obama and Trump, 2014-2020
The rise of the Islamic State (ISIS) and its rapid spread through Iraq and Syria in 2013-2014 posed a new challenge to the anti-terrorism policy of the United States. During 2014-2020 Presidents Barack Obama (2014-2017) and Donald Trump (2017-2020) were forced to contend with the prolonged military campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. This article examines the nature of the military involvement during the terms of the two presidents, divided into three main criteria: actual military presence (boots on the ground); aid and support efforts for local forces; and air strikes conducted independently and as part of the international coalition. The purpose of the article is to compare how Presidents Obama and Trump formed their military strategy and acted in relation to these three criteria.