At a pivotal moment for the Middle East, The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune convened senior policymakers, strategists, and thought leaders for a private breakfast briefing marking the publication of its seventeenth issue.
The gathering featured distinguished guest speaker Eliot A. Cohen — strategist, author, former Counselor at the U.S. State Department, and Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at Center for Strategic and International Studies — whose work has long shaped serious thinking on war, statecraft, and American strategy.
Held under Chatham House Rules, the discussion itself remains confidential.
But the strategic questions that brought participants together could not be more urgent.
How should we think about the day after conflict?
What might Iran’s transition mean for the region?
And can this historic moment help shape a genuinely new Middle East?
These questions are no longer theoretical. They are shaping the future now.
The Day After: Iran’s Transition and the Architecture of a New Middle East
by
April 2026
Recent Articles
Towards a Civilizational Perception of the Jewish State
In contemporary studies of international relations, the cultural background of foreign policy has become a central analytical tool for understanding how nations and non-state actors behave on the global stage. Scholars such as Alexander Wendt, Peter Katzenstein, and Benedict Anderson have demonstrated that states do not act solely according to material interests; rather, their foreign […]
AI as the Next World Order
Artificial Intelligence is not merely the latest sector of industrial advancement. It is the architect of a new global paradigm — rapidly becoming the operating system of economy, politics, governance, and military force. The historical trajectory of human progress has always been dictated by the relationship between the tools of production and the structures of governance. The […]
ISRAEL’S NUCLEAR DETERRENCE
CASTING A WIDER “NET”
CASTING A WIDER “NET”
Even after “Operation Roaring Lion” and America’s “Operation Epic Fury,” Israel’s presumptive nuclear weapons remain essential for deterrence of nuclear threats. There are also foreseeable circumstances in which these weapons could deter certain non-nuclear threats. Most plausible, in this connection, would be circumstances in which the enemy threats referenced large-scale conventional attacks (whether first-strike attacks […]
