MEF Dispatch: Getting Yemen Wrong, What Next for Syria, & Five Analyses of Iran

Getting Yemen Wrong, What Next for Syria, & Five Analyses of Iran

By Winfield Myers ● May 28, 2025

Smart Brevity® count: 8 mins...2095 words

We begin with a special report by Edmond Fitton-Brown, the former U.K. ambassador to Yemen, on the myriad mistakes the international community made during the Houthi takeover of Yemen. The disastrous 2018 Stockholm Agreement “handed them the foothold that they needed to launch their campaign of international blackmail.” Today, however, there is a “unique opportunity to coerce a change in Iran”—and it will likely involve force.

Daniel Pipes warns that Syria's jihadi transition under Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Turkish proxy, poses a grave threat. Türkiye's orchestration of a Sunni jihadi state in Syria as a proxy against Israel, he says, is a strategic gambit with severe long-term implications. Because the new Syrian government is a jihadist tool of Ankara, providing it with unconditional benefits is a mistake.

We end with five articles that analyze Iran. From its alarming birth slump, which Nicholas Eberstadt notes mimics that of secular Europe, to its ongoing energy crisis, Iran faces myriad challenges. Yet, warns Hussein Aboubakr Mansour, that does not change the dynamics of U.S.-Iran diplomacy, about which he writes: “There is no endgame. There is only the patient architecture of denial, disruption, and deterrence, until the regime, by its own contradictions, collapses under the weight of its ambitions.”

ICYMI: Israel Insider with Alex Selsky

Is Israel on its way to conquering Gaza? What are the main challenges and possible consequences of the operation now under way?

Alex Selsky is a senior adviser to MEF's Israel Victory Project, and lecturer at Jerusalem Multidisciplinary College. He is currently serving as Homefront Command reserve major in the Israel Defense Forces. Formerly, he served as advisor to Prime Minister Netanyahu and as CEO of the International Israel Beytenu Movement. He holds a B.A. in Business and Executive M.A. in Public Policy from Hebrew University.

To watch the full podcast episode, click here.

How the International Community Got Yemen Wrong

The international community's failure to maintain its initial strong stance on Yemen enabled the Houthis to exploit the Stockholm Agreement, leveraging it for territorial gains and emboldening further aggression.

Why it matters: The U.N. Security Council's Resolution 2140 initially aimed to curb the chaos in Yemen by sanctioning key figures, yet the subsequent Stockholm Agreement undermined these efforts.

This resolution's goal was to support Yemen's legitimate governance, but shifting priorities led to a diluted international response.

Driving the news: Saudi Arabia's intervention in 2015, backed by the internationally recognized Yemeni government, aimed to quash the Houthi rebellion, which threatened to destabilize the region.

The Houthis’ actions, fueled by Iran, posed a direct threat to the Sunni majority and regional stability.

Between the lines: The Stockholm Agreement of 2018, rather than curbing the Houthi threat, facilitated their strategic positioning.

This misstep by the international community allowed the Houthis to solidify their power, prolonging Yemen's turmoil.

The stakes: Given that Iran is the senior partner in the Axis of Resistance and Iran poses the strategic threat to world peace through its nuclear program, the U.S. needs to decide exactly what are the objectives of its Iran policy and then harmonize its Yemen policy with those.

If not regime change (which is possible, given the current weakness of the Islamic Republic) then the abandoning or destruction of all of Iran’s aggressive programs: nuclear enrichment, ballistic missile development, asymmetric warfare via the Houthis, Hezbollah, the Iraqi proxy militias and the other components of the Axis.

This will require determination and probably force.

To read the full report, click here.

Interview with Daniel Pipes: What Next for Syria?

World Geostrategic Insights: Daniel Pipes, in a 2013 National Review article, wrote that “When enemies of the West are in conflict, it is in our interest to aid the losing side.” Today, he warns that Syria's jihadi transition under Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Turkish proxy, poses a grave threat.

The Assad regime's downfall could unleash a wave of instability, with Türkiye leveraging its influence to reshape the region.

Why it matters: The HTS-led transitional government, entwined with jihadist ideology and backed by Türkiye, threatens to destabilize regional power dynamics and embolden already-strong anti-Israel sentiments.

This realignment risks igniting further conflict, with jihadist elements exploiting Syrian anarchy.

The stakes: Türkiye's orchestration of a Sunni jihadi state in Syria as a proxy against Israel is a strategic gambit with severe long-term implications.

Turkish President Erdoğan's ambitions could set the stage for heightened regional tensions and direct confrontations.

What’s next: President Trump's lifting of sanctions on Syria empowers HTS and Türkiye, risking a shift in U.S. Middle East policy that may encourage hostile actors.

Because the new Syrian government is a jihadist tool of Ankara, lifting sanctions on it is a mistake.

To read the full interview, click here.

Reminder – “The Forum Roundtable: Stealth Jihad and Islamists in the West”

When: Thursday, May 29, 11:30AM Eastern Time

While violence remains a primary tactic for Islamist movements, those who seek death to America, Israel and the West also operate in more subtle, irreversible and dangerous ways. College campuses post-October 7 have witnessed severe and continued pro-Hamas and pro-jihad agitation (seemingly greenlighted by administrators and faculty members who have enabled and abetted the Islamist narratives used to indoctrinate young minds for decades). This constitutes only one obvious result of the West’s failure to address the stealth jihad that’s taking place across the Western world.

Frank J. Gaffney is the president of the Institute for the American Future and the host of “Securing America with Frank Gaffney” on the Real America’s Voice network.

Daniel Greenfield is the CEO of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Lauri Regan, host of the Forum Roundtable podcast series, serves as the vice president, treasurer, and board member of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and as a board member of Polaris National Security.

Sam Westrop is director of the Middle East Forum’s Islamist Watch project.

To register for the Roundtable, click here.

Iran’s Seemingly Unstoppable Birth Slump

Despite pro-natal policies, fertility in Iran is plummeting, with births falling below the million mark in 2024-2025.

Why it matters: Iran's fertility rate is now alarmingly low, at about 1.45, which is 30 percent below replacement level, signaling long-term demographic and economic challenges.

Tehran province is even worse, with a total fertility rate possibly as low as 1.15, indicating severe population decline.

By the numbers: The U.N. expected Iran's births to stay above a million until 2050, but current trends are ahead by a generation.

This rapid decline aligns with regional patterns, as Turkey reports a total fertility rate of 1.48, and mirrors Europe’s secular fertility levels.

The intrigue: Europe’s fertility patterns reflect its secular values: It is basically a post-Christian zone.

Is a secular society likewise hiding beneath Iran’s religious dictatorship?

To read the full article, click here.

Deepening Energy Crisis in Iran Sparks Protests

Iran's reliance on cheap, government-subsidized energy to placate a restless population has led to a catastrophic energy crisis, igniting protests.

Why it matters: With industries grinding to a halt and truck drivers striking over fuel cuts, Iran teeters on the brink of economic implosion.

The current unrest mirrors the deadly 2019 protests, highlighting the regime's inability to manage its crises without resorting to brutal crackdowns.

By the numbers: Iran wastes up to $60 billion annually on energy subsidies, with diesel production costs grossly outpacing subsidized prices.

The regime's allocation of $15 billion in crude oil to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps underscores its prioritization of military over economic stability.

The stakes: As the government blames citizens for excessive energy use, despite their significantly lower consumption compared to the West, its strategies risk further igniting public outrage.

With rampant inflation and a collapsing currency, the regime gambles on repression as its best survival strategy.

What’s next: Even if all three northern neighbors—Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and Armenia—were to supply their entire electricity generation to Iran, it would not cover even half of Iran’s summer electricity deficit.

This massive crisis unfolds even as the Islamic Republic claims to be enriching uranium for nuclear power generation. Yet, nuclear-powered electricity accounts for less than 1 percent of total power production.

To read the full article, click here.

Why Washington Must Accept the Limits of Diplomacy with Iran

The Trump administration's negotiations with Iran signal a return to a familiar pattern: tactical accommodation with a regime inherently incompatible with long-term resolution.

Why it matters: Iran remains a revolutionary regime, thriving on ideological expansion and proxy warfare, making permanent nuclear deals elusive.

Agreements like the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provide temporary stability but fail to address Iran's strategic ambitions.

The pursuit of a JCPOA-lite not only misreads the nature of the Iranian regime but invites a recurrence of the very cycle the original withdrawal sought to break.

The stakes: Iran's foreign policy, driven by asymmetric disruption and ideological antagonism, undermines any hope for normalization.

The regime's reliance on proxies and nuclear latency as tools of survival limits the effectiveness of diplomatic engagements.

What’s next: The United States must reaffirm its commitment to allied regional deterrence, particularly with Israel, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia.

This is achieved through integrated missile defense systems, shared intelligence frameworks, and agreed-upon joint red lines regarding Iranian escalation. Containment must be regional, not rhetorical.

The bottom line: Strategic endurance is not a passive doctrine; it is a deliberate refusal to indulge in cycles of hope and disillusionment. A post-agreement Iran strategy must begin with this realism: there is no endgame.

There is only the patient architecture of denial, disruption, and deterrence, until the regime, by its own contradictions, collapses under the weight of its ambitions.

To read the full article, click here.

Iran Rejects U.S. Red Line on Enrichment, Raising Stakes for Trump

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's outright rejection of U.S. demands to halt uranium enrichment has intensified tensions, pushing the Trump administration towards a critical decision.

Why it matters: The U.S. has set a non-negotiable red line against Iran's enrichment capabilities, making Khamenei's defiance a direct affront.

The Trump administration, eager for swift results, is now cornered, risking strategic and political fallout.

The stakes: Iran perceives U.S. withdrawal of military assets as a sign of weakness, emboldening Khamenei to challenge American resolve.

Facing regional setbacks and internal pressures, Khamenei may be trying to hold his ground while probing for any sign of U.S. flexibility to avoid a total rollback of Iran’s nuclear program.

What’s next: Short of military action, the most potent remaining lever is economic pressure. The U.S. Navy could begin seizing Iranian tankers smuggling oil to China.

But such a move risks Iranian retaliation against shipping in the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf—potentially triggering a military confrontation.

Arab allies fear collateral damage, while Republicans demand a hard line against any deal resembling the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The bottom line: Accepting limited enrichment would mirror the Obama administration’s JCPOA—the very agreement Trump pulled out of during his first term.

To read the full article, click here.

Iranians Debate Whether Economy or Democracy Should Be Priority After Regime Change

Trump's Middle East tour reignites a critical debate in Iran: After regime change, should the nation prioritize economic recovery over democracy, amid its stark decline?

Why it matters: Once a regional powerhouse, Iran's economy now trails Arab monarchies, demonstrating the bleak legacy of the 1979 revolution and its false promises of democracy.

The Islamic regime's repressive grip has stifled both economic potential and political freedoms, retarding Iran’s economic progress and making it poorer.

The stakes: Some Iranians see authoritarian development as a necessary evil to rebuild the nation, looking to the success of Arab monarchies.

They envision a secular state that permits broad economic and social freedoms while maintaining centralized control to prioritize national reconstruction.

Opponents warn that without democracy, corruption and repression will persist, echoing the Islamic Republic's failures.

What’s next: The question looms: Can Iran balance secularism, democracy, and economic growth, or will it continue down a path of decay?

In the end, most anti-regime voices and activists advocate for a combination of all three goals: secularism, democracy, and economic progress. Whether that balance is attainable remains an open question—but for many Iranians, it is the only way forward.

To read the full article, click here.

Thank you for your support and for relying on the Middle East Forum to help make sense of competing and often contradictory headlines. If you enjoyed this issue of the Dispatch, please forward it to a friend. We invite you to use the comments feature to let us know your thoughts on this issue.

Sincerely,

Winfield Myers
Managing Editor, Middle East Forum
Director, Campus Watch

Was this edition useful?

Your email will be recorded and shared with the sender

Powered by