From global think tanks
The analyses published here do not necessarily reflect the strategic thinking of The Global Eye.
Today’s about: Azerbaijan-China; Georgia; Iran; Israel; Russia; US; US-Iran; US-Israel-Middle East; US-Russia
Azerbaijan – China
(Syed Fazl-e-Haider – The Jamestown Foundation) Azerbaijan has been leveraging its strategic partnership with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and establishing ties through political alignment on the “one-China principle,” investment, technology, and diplomatic support to advance its ambitions in the South Caucasus. Baku views cooperation with Beijing as central to developing the Middle Corridor, reducing reliance on Russia and traditional routes, attracting PRC investment, and positioning Azerbaijan as a key Eurasian transport and logistics hub. Deepening military, energy, and diplomatic ties with the PRC further solidify Azerbaijan’s regional position but risk complicating its relations with Western partners as Beijing’s influence grows. – Azerbaijan Leverages Strategic Partnership with PRC – Jamestown
Georgia
(Giorgi Menabde – The Jamestown Foundation) The Georgian Ministry of Internal Affairs has made more than 100 arrests over the past few months as part of a nationwide crackdown on organized crime. They are charged with participating in criminal activities and carrying out orders from leaders of the criminal underworld, so-called “thieves-in-law,” who mostly reside in Russia and Europe. “Thieves-in-law,” a Soviet and post-Soviet term for leaders of organized crime organizations, has deep roots in Georgian culture and society. Former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s 2005 reforms made a significant contribution to the fight against organized crime. Many “thieves-in-law” have been expelled from Georgia, but continue to operate from Europe. They actively participate in business and social processes and have the potential to leverage their influence and social power to undermine the government’s legitimacy. – Tbilisi’s Long Fight Against Organized Crime Continues – Jamestown
Iran
(Council on Foreign Relations) Iran’s system of government is not quite a democracy, nor a theocracy. Founding Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini developed its animating doctrine, known as guardianship of the jurist, in the years before the Islamic Republic’s establishment in 1979. Khomeini posited that a just government was possible if religious scholars sat atop it to ensure consistency with Islamic law. This system was put into place with a constitutional referendum after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The organs of a modern republic—a unicameral legislature (the majlis), executive led by the president, and judiciary—were enveloped by a clerical system. (Most of Iran’s clerical hierarchy, however, remains outside this official structure, based in Qom rather than the capital, Tehran.). Regime hard-liners have further consolidated power across these institutions in recent years. They won control of parliament in the 2020 and 2024 elections, neither of which was considered free or fair. The regime has often state-managed presidential elections in Iran. However, the 2024 election, triggered by the sudden death of President Ebrahim Raisi, yielded a surprise result, with Masoud Pezeshkian becoming the country’s first so-called reformist leader in two decades. Yet as antigovernment protests spread across Iran in 2026, Iranians were met with a severe crackdown that exemplified the outsized control the Supreme Leader’s orbit has over the country. – The Islamic Republic’s Power Centers | Council on Foreign Relations
Israel
(Amir Asmar – Atlantic Council) Israel will be there when US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace convenes for the first time in Washington on Thursday, with a splashy pledge of five billion dollars to rebuild the Gaza Strip, as Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar will mingle among leaders from Gulf countries and others who are taking part in this new Trump project. It may make for a nice visual, but there’s no mistaking the fact that Israel’s international reputation has been tarnished due to its conduct in Gaza since the launch of fighting after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attacks. This is evident in International Criminal Court indictments and United Nations resolutions, but even in the United States, a stalwart ally. According to Pew Research, 53 percent of US adults reported a negative attitude toward Israel last year, up from 42 percent in 2022. Nonetheless, the apparent end of the war presents a unique moment for Israel to examine its present status and trajectory. Building on its presence on the Board of Peace, Israel can begin to address international criticism by funding and leading the reconstruction of Gaza. While the current Israeli government and broader political culture are unlikely to permit serious consideration of such a proposal, a significant change in Jerusalem’s Palestinian policy is needed if it hopes to begin changing the widely held perception that Israel’s military was purposely targeting civilians. It would also demonstrate remorse for the loss of innocent life and property unconnected to militant groups. The obvious precedent here is US-led reconstruction programs in West Germany and Japan after World War II. But that is just one step Jerusalem should consider to establish itself as a worthy partner to its neighbors and a responsible member of the international community. A closer examination of the past couple years shows how far it has to go. – Israel needs a fundamental shift in its foreign policy – Atlantic Council
Russia
(John C.K.Daly – The Jamestown Foundation) Russian Railways (RZhD) cargo volumes dropped by 5.6 percent in 2025 to a 16-year low due to reduced shipments of oil, construction materials, metals, and coal, resulting from both the rising demands of Russia’s war economy and increasingly challenging global markets. Russia’s mounting debt places RZhD at the center of the country’s economic challenges, as the rail network’s historically lower debt levels have risen sharply amid plunging freight volumes, high interest rates, and a broader economic downturn. RZhD will face mounting serious financial difficulties due to the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine, increasing Western sanctions, and rising financing costs despite being considered “too big to fail.” – Russian Railways Faces Economic Setbacks – Jamestown
US
(James M. Lindsay – Council on Foreign Relations) Donald Trump has made hedging hot. His transactional, some would say predatory, approach to foreign policy has many traditional U.S. friends, partners, and allies rethinking their ties with Washington. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney manifested their concern at the World Economic Forum last month when he spoke of how allies need to “diversify to hedge against uncertainty” in the face of the “rupture” in the global order triggered by “hegemons” seeking to “monetize their relations.”. The standing ovation that greeted Carney’s speech attests to the desire many countries have to gain “independence” from the United States, as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz put it a year ago. But desires often do not translate into deeds. Which raises two sets of questions: Where and how fast will the hedging take place? And will the United States necessarily regret being less relevant to others? You do not need to have taken a graduate course in international relations theory to understand why many traditional U.S. friends, partners, and allies want to lessen their dependence on the United States. Trump’s unsentimental and often hostile foreign policy has transformed their deep ties to the United States, long seen as a source of strength, into a vulnerability. As the Belgian Prime Minister has put it: “Being a happy vassal is one thing. Being a miserable slave is another.” When friends cease to be friendly, the wise look for new friends. – Will U.S. Allies Succeed in Hedging Against the United States? | Council on Foreign Relations
(Rebecca Patterson, Allison J. Smith, Ishaan Thakker – Council on Foreign Relations) American households would feel better about the cost of living if tariffs were lowered as part of the affordability policy agenda. That was the conclusion from a Council on Foreign Relations opinion poll conducted in January 2026 in partnership with Morning Consult. More than 65 percent of the 2,203 respondents said tariffs had made a range of everyday items less affordable, including food and groceries, health care, housing, and transportation. Importantly, that sentiment was expressed by a plurality of people identifying themselves as Democrats and Republicans. The challenge is that the cost of those goods is shaped by numerous factors—tariffs are just one piece of the puzzle. Still, the poll suggests that the high-profile nature of tariffs since President Donald Trump returned to the White House has made them top of mind, and that perception is as much an issue as reality. As a result, other steps to tackle affordability, such as proposed caps on credit card fees and limits on large-scale institutional purchases of homes, may not help sentiment, at least in the near-term, as much as rolling back tariffs on items Americans say they care about the most. – CFR Poll Shows Americans Across Party Lines Tie Tariffs to Affordability | Council on Foreign Relations
US – Iran
(Clayton Seigle – CSIS) Crude oil prices have fluctuated in recent days along with headlines about potential military strikes against Iran, as a second round of indirect talks between U.S. and Iranian representatives concluded on February 17 without resolving underlying disputes. While international benchmark Brent crude prices fell toward $67 on February 17, markets are still showing increased risk against the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s predicted $58 Brent average for 2026. President Donald Trump has hinted at potential military strikes unless Iran agrees to fully abandon nuclear enrichment, accept strict limits on missile capabilities, and halt support for regional proxy groups. This analysis assesses the risk of oil supply disruptions that could result from a new conflagration in the Middle East Gulf region. – If Trump Strikes Iran: Mapping the Oil Disruption Scenarios
US – Israel – Middle East
(The Soufan Center) Differences between Israeli and U.S. leaders on key issues in the Middle East, particularly strategy toward Iran, might determine whether the region calms or flares into a broader conflagration. Trump insists that Israel support U.S. diplomacy with Tehran, backed by the threat of force, before the U.S. or Israel further considers military action against Iran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu indicates he might, even without U.S. approval, use force to try to topple Iran’s regime or, at the very least, cripple its missile and other deterrent capabilities. Netanyahu is skeptical that Trump’s Gaza peace plan will succeed and has threatened to restart the war against Hamas if the group refuses to comply with the plan’s disarmament requirements. – U.S. and Israel Diverge on Key Regional Files – The Soufan Center
US – Russia
(Donald N. Jensen, Iuliia Osmolovska – Atlantic Council) Russia has a markedly different approach to diplomatic negotiations than the United States. For Russian leaders, negotiations are a form of warfare by nonmilitary means, a competition that they seek to win with few or no compromises. The Kremlin’s views of negotiations are also powerfully shaped today by the elites’ attitudes toward a rules-based international system, which they view as inimical to Russian interests and in need of a radical overhaul. They see the United States as being in a prolonged period of decline, a view they believe provides opportunities for Russia to exploit. The United States can significantly empower itself in negotiations by better understanding the sources and range of Moscow’s behaviors at the table and adapting effective counter-measures. It can temper the impact of the Kremlin’s tactics and advance progress toward lasting agreements by selecting and shaping the negotiating environment. Success should not be defined by seeking good relations or a good deal as ends in themselves, but by negotiating in a way that advances US foreign policy goals. – Negotiating with Putin’s Russia – Atlantic Council
