Opponents of military action against Iran assume a U.S. military strike would be far more dangerous than simply letting Tehran build a bomb. Not so, argues this former Pentagon defense planner. With a carefully designed strike, Washington could mitigate the costs—or at least bring them down to a bearable level—and spare the region and the world from an unacceptable threat.

Matthew Kroenig and Barry Pavel examine the potential of deterrence to help thwart future terrorist attacks.

Barry Pavel and Matthew H. Kroenig argue that while a deterrence approach holds great potential for helping to thwart future al Qaeda attacks, it remains a poorly understood and underutilized element of U.S. counterterrorism strategy.

Jamie Fly and Matthew H. Kroenig argue that drawing red lines linked to the guaranteed use of force by Washington and its allies could be the best way to avoid conflict with Iran.

Matthew Kroenig and Barry Pavel examine the potential of deterrence to help thwart future terrorist attacks.

The European Union's embargo on Iranian oil may bring Iran to the negotiating table but is unlikely to halt its controversial nuclear program, says CFR's Matthew Kroenig.

Barry Pavel and Matthew H. Kroenig argue that while a deterrence approach holds great potential for helping to thwart future al Qaeda attacks, it remains a poorly understood and underutilized element of U.S. counterterrorism strategy.

Matthew H. Kroenig argues that the world will not be safer if the United States had no nuclear weapons.

Matthew H. Kroenig et al provide a new approach to conceptualization and measurement of regimes.

Matthew H. Kroenig, Melissa McAdam, and Steven Weber develop a theory about the conditions under which state efforts to employ soft power will be most likely to succeed.