Leslie H. Gelb discusses the need to examine the rationale for, and potential consequences of, going to war with Iran.

Ray Takeyh says Iran's recent aggression is based on Tehran diligently pursuing a three-track policy that involves provocation of the international community and making noises about diplomacy as it relentlessly marches toward the bomb.

The latest revelations over Iran's uranium enrichment activities have triggered debate over a slew of policy options from more sanctions to preventive strikes.

Micah Zenko and Emma Welch argue that while the Republican presidential candidates overwhelmingly describe the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability as "unacceptable" and endorse the use of military force if that were necessary to prevent an Iranian bomb, there is a complete absence of any details on how the use of force could accomplish this ambitious objective.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave this statement on January 10, 2012 regarding Iran's enrichment program at the Qom facility.

Sanctions over Iran's nuclear program have triggered threats involving the strategic Strait of Hormuz and new debate over the methods chosen to pressure Tehran.

Captain Bradley S. Russell, USN and Max Boot argue that Iran must realize that by initiating direct hostilities in the Strait of Hormuz, it risks American retaliation against their covert nuclear-weapons program.

Frank G. Klotz argues that both India and Pakistan have an interest in taking steps to enhance strategic stability in the region and to reduce the possibility of nuclear conflict resulting from miscalculation or deliberate escalation in a crisis.

Paul B. Stares argues that in the wake of Kim Jong-il's death, rather than wait for signs out of Pyongyang, the United States should now signal its interest in developing a more productive relationship with North Korea.

Scott A. Snyder asks, "What are the prospects for a unified, nuclear-free Korea?"

Following the death of leader Kim Jong-il, the transition of power in North Korea could see Pyongyang engaging in further provocative activities, says CFR's Paul Stares.

Scott A. Snyder discusses the implications of Kim Jong-Il's death.

Kim Jong-il's death has prompted discussion about the future of the isolated country and its nuclear weapons program. Experts cited in this CFR Backgrounder believe a post-Kim regime in North Korea would remain a tough nuclear negotiator.

Frank G. Klotz, Susan J. Koch, and Franklin C. Miller argue that as the United States and Russia continue to reduce long-range, strategic nuclear weapons to increasingly lower levels, a disparity in tactical nuclear weapons has serious implications for the overall nuclear balance between the two countries and the continued efficacy of the U.S. nuclear umbrella for its allies.

Ray Takeyh says Iran's rulers view possession of a nuclear bomb as a means to return to the international fold on their own terms.

Ray Takeyh and Suzanne Maloney say that despite decades of struggling under punitive financial measures, Iran has persisted with its objectionable policies, ranging from terrorism to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Secretary of State Clinton gave these remarks on December 7, 2011 at the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention Review Conference in Geneva, Switzerland.

Max Boot says the West is still failing to face up to the growing threat from the Islamic Republic.

CFR fellows Matthew Kroenig, Elliot Abrams and Ray Takeyh discuss the findings of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran's nuclear program.

The UN nuclear agency's latest report contains no "gotcha" disclosures about Iran's nuclear capability but creates a clear impression of a weapons program in the works, says expert Mark Hibbs.