This report discusses the relationship between Iraq and Iran in the post-Saddam Hussein era, with particular focus on what Iran's intentions and/or long-term goals may be for increasing its influence in Iraq. The report explores the various strategies that Iran has used to spread its influence throughout Iraq's military and political spheres. The report also addresses the United States' concern over the Iran-Iraq relationship, especially as it concerns armed Shiite factions and U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq.

This report discusses Iraq's political system, which has been restructured through a U.S.-supported election process. The Iraqi government is increasingly characterized by peaceful competition rather than violence, but sectarianism and ethnic and factional infighting still remain. This report discusses issues relating to opponents of the Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and also discusses the atmosphere of nationwide provincial elections. The report also addresses the Obama Administration's plan to reduce the U.S. troop presence in Iraq by August 2010 and briefly addresses the Iranian influence in Iraq.

This report discusses the situation immediately following the completion of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, when relations among major political factions worsened substantially, threatening Iraq's stability and the legacy of the U.S. intervention in Iraq. It includes an overview of historical and current political, military, and governance issues as well as an analysis of Iraq in relation to the other nations in the region.

This report discusses the situation immediately following the completion of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, when relations among major political factions worsened substantially, threatening Iraq's stability and the legacy of the U.S. intervention in Iraq. It includes an overview of historical and current political, military, and governance issues as well as an analysis of Iraq in relation to the other nations in the region.

This report discusses the situation immediately following the completion of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, when relations among major political factions worsened substantially, threatening Iraq's stability and the legacy of the U.S. intervention in Iraq. It includes an overview of historical and current political, military, and governance issues as well as an analysis of Iraq in relation to the other nations in the region.

This report discusses the situation immediately following the completion of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq on December 18, 2011, when relations among major political factions worsened substantially, threatening Iraq's stability and the legacy of the U.S. intervention in Iraq. It includes an overview of historical and current political, military, and governance issues as well as an analysis of Iraq in relation to the other nations in the region.

This report examines logistical support contracts for troop support services in Iraq and Afghanistan (for Afghanistan, beginning with LOGCAP IV) administered through the U.S. Army's Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP). LOGCAP is an initiative designed to manage the use of civilian contractors that perform services during times of war and other military mobilizations.

This report discusses the Iran-Iraq conflict at its present state, which has become a war of attrition with neither side capable of achieving a decisive military victory over the other in the short term. U.S. policy concerns currently are threefold: first, that Iraq, despite moves to sustain its economic and military capacities, ultimately might suffer a destabilizing defeat to the detriment of U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf region; second, that future instability in Iran could open opportunities for Soviet exploitation; and third, that the conflict might expand beyond its present confines to threaten friendly regional states and the availability of their vast petroleum resources.

This report analyzes war funding for the Defense Department and tracks funding for USAID and VA Medical funding. Information on costs is useful to Congress to assess the FY2010 Supplemental for war costs for the Department of Defense (DOD) and State/USAID, FY2011 war requests, conduct oversight of past war costs, and consider the longer-term costs implications of the buildup of troops in Afghanistan and potential problems in the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

This report analyzes war funding for the Department of Defense (DOD) and tracks funding for USAID and Veteran's Affairs (VA) Medical funding. Information on costs helps Congress to assess the FY2010 Supplemental for war costs for the Department of Defense (DOD) and State/USAID FY2011 war requests; conduct oversight of past war costs; and consider the longer-term costs implications of the buildup of troops in Afghanistan and potential problems in the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

A 1996 amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) enables American victims of international terrorist acts supported by certain States designated by the State Department as supporters of terrorism - Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, and previously Iraq and Libya - to bring suit in U.S. courts to seek monetary damages. This report, which will be updated, provides an overview of these issues and relevant legislation (H.R. 5167).

A 1996 amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) enables American victims of international terrorist acts supported by certain States designated by the State Department as supporters of terrorism - Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, and previously Iraq and Libya - to bring suit in U.S. courts to seek monetary damages. This report, which will be updated, provides an overview of these issues and relevant legislation (H.R. 5167).

This report discusses the political environment in Iraq and its implications on U.S. policy. Much of the debate over U.S. policy toward Iran has centered on the nature of the current regime. Some experts believe that Iran, a country of almost 70 million people, is a threat to U.S. interests because hardliners in Iran’s regime dominate and set a policy direction intended to challenge U.S. influence and allies in the region. President Bush, in his January 29, 2002, State of the Union message, labeled Iran part of an “axis of evil” along with Iraq and North Korea.

The Tigris and Euphrates are international rivers vital to the four countries through which they flow: Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. The population in the region has more than doubled in less than thirty years, and irrigated agriculture, hydroelectric power generation, industrialization, and urbanization have increased. All of these developments require more water, and the dependence of the riparian nations on the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers has become apparent, as has the need for comprehensive, basin-wide management of water resources. At present the riparians have shown some concern about the management of water in the two rivers, although no consensus exists as to the precise nature of the problem or what should be done to resolve it. This policy-oriented dissertation attempts to help frame the policy issues of managing the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates basin. It also seeks to provide an understanding of the policy process and to meet the intelligence needs of policy-makers with regard to the future management of these international waterways. Finally, it provides strategies for developing and implementing a cooperative water policy for this international basin.

Report discussing the efforts made by the Bush Administration regarding Iran and U.S. foreign policy. The report also highlights major concerns surrounding Iran's human rights practices, strict limits on democracy, and attempts to exert influence over a destabilized Iraq by way of providing arms and other assistance to Islamic extremist groups.

This report discusses the political future of various countries in the Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region. A change in the leadership in these countries could significantly affect their policies toward the United States and their willingness to cooperate with the United States in achieving the stability needed to advance U.S. interests in this important region.

This report discusses the debate over U.S. policy toward Iran, much of which has centered on the nature of the current regime. Some experts believe that Iran, a country of almost 70 million people, is a threat to U.S. interests because hardliners in Iran’s regime dominate and set a policy direction intended to challenge U.S. influence and allies in the region. President Bush, in his January 29, 2002, State of the Union message, labeled Iran part of an “axis of evil” along with Iraq and North Korea.

This report discusses the debate over U.S. policy toward Iran, much of which has centered on the nature of the current regime. Some experts believe that Iran, a country of almost 70 million people, is a threat to U.S. interests because hardliners in Iran’s regime dominate and set a policy direction intended to challenge U.S. influence and allies in the region. President Bush, in his January 29, 2002, State of the Union message, labeled Iran part of an “axis of evil” along with Iraq and North Korea.

This report discusses the debate over U.S. policy toward Iran, much of which has centered on the nature of the current regime. Some experts believe that Iran, a country of almost 70 million people, is a threat to U.S. interests because hardliners in Iran’s regime dominate and set a policy direction intended to challenge U.S. influence and allies in the region. President Bush, in his January 29, 2002, State of the Union message, labeled Iran part of an “axis of evil” along with Iraq and North Korea.

The objective of this study is to describe and analyze the management of communal conflict in the Middle East, focusing on the Kurds. To this end, an effort is made to examine (1) the means that have been used to manage the Kurdish conflict by Middle Eastern countries; (2) the degree of success or failure of applied measures and (3) possible explanations for the first two questions.

Deficient productive capacity has not yet caused an oil crisis, but that does not mean it never will. Significant increases in world oil demand will have to be met primarily from Persian Gulf supplies. This is a region with a history of wars, illegal occupations, soups, revolutions, sabotage, terrorism, and oil embargoes. To these possibilities may be added growing Islamist movements with various antipathies to the West. If oil production were constrained, oil prices could rise abruptly along with adverse world economic repercussions. If the IEA and EIA are correct on the demand side, deficient world oil productive capacity could cause an oil crisis within 15 years and political disruptions in Saudi Arabia could cause one sooner. However, if the increases in world oil demand were more moderate, and there is long-term relative peace in the Middle East, with increasing foreign participation in upstream oil activities, a business as usual world oil demand and supply situation would be a likely scenario for much of the next century.

According to an Administration national security strategy document released on March 16, 2006, the United States "may face no greater challenge from a single country than Iran." The Bush Administration announced May 31, 2006, that it would negotiate with Iran in concert with U.S. allies. If diplomacy and sanctions do not succeed, some advocate military action against Iran's nuclear infrastructure rather than acquiescence to a nuclear-armed Iran. U.S. concerns regarding Iran include Iran's nuclear program, Iran's influence on Iraq by way of providing arms and other material assistance to Shiite Islamist militias, and Iran's human rights practices, which include strict limits on free expression and repression of ethnic and religious minorities.

According to an Administration national security strategy document released on March 16, 2006, the United States "may face no greater challenge from a single country than Iran." The Bush Administration announced May 31, 2006, that it would negotiate with Iran in concert with U.S. allies. If diplomacy and sanctions do not succeed, some advocate military action against Iran's nuclear infrastructure rather than acquiescence to a nuclear-armed Iran. U.S. concerns regarding Iran include Iran's nuclear program, Iran's influence on Iraq by way of providing arms and other material assistance to Shiite Islamist militias, and Iran's human rights practices, which include strict limits on free expression and repression of ethnic and religious minorities.

According to an Administration national security strategy document released on March 16, 2006, the United States "may face no greater challenge from a single country than Iran." The Bush Administration announced May 31, 2006, that it would negotiate with Iran in concert with U.S. allies. If diplomacy and sanctions do not succeed, some advocate military action against Iran's nuclear infrastructure rather than acquiescence to a nuclear-armed Iran. U.S. concerns regarding Iran include Iran's nuclear program, Iran's influence on Iraq by way of providing arms and other material assistance to Shiite Islamist militias, and Iran's human rights practices, which include strict limits on free expression and repression of ethnic and religious minorities.