Bruce Rutherford's Egypt After Mubarak is an ambitious effort to explain how the Muslim Brotherhood, the judiciary, and the business sector can work in parallel, if not exactly together, to influence Egypt's political future.

If it hopes to bring peace to the Middle East, the Obama administration must put Palestinian politics and goals first.

To avoid some of the mistakes from past Israeli-Palestinian peace processes, the Obama administration should consult Martin Indyk's insider account.

To be successful in the Middle East, the Obama administration will need to move beyond Iraq, find ways to deal constructively with Iran, and forge a final-status Israeli-Palestinian agreement.

The real decision-maker in Iran is Supreme Leader Khamenei not President Ahmedinejad. Blaming Iran's problems on President Ahmadinejad inaccurately suggests that Iran's problems will go away when Ahmadinejad does.

U.S. troops in Iraq may guarantee security, but they will not bring about political reconciliation, the key to stability.

The situation in Iraq is improving. With the right strategy, the United States will eventually be able to draw down troops without sacrificing stability.

Israel should pull back settlements and give up its '67 gains in order to secure its '48 victory.

The real key to Washington's pro-Israel policy is long-lasting and broad-based support for the Jewish state among the American public at large.

Washington can promote political reform best by backing off.

Stopping three decades of unnecessary bungling.

Robert Kagan's Return of History ignores the Iraqi elephant in the room.

Today, tomorrow, or yesterday?

The Bush administration's new strategy in Iraq has produced short-term gains at the expense of the long-term goal of a stable, unitary Iraq.

The Bush administration wants to contain Iran by rallying the support of Sunni Arab states and now sees Iran's containment as the heart of its Middle East policy: a way to stabilize Iraq, declaw Hezbollah, and restart the Arab-Israeli peace process. But the strategy is unsound and impractical, and it will probably further destabilize an already volatile region.

The current debate over the United States' failures in Iraq needs to go beyond bumper-sticker conclusions -- no more preemption, no more democracy promotion, no more nation building -- and acrimonious finger-pointing. Only by carefully considering where U.S. leaders, institutions, and policies have been at fault can valuable lessons be learned and future debacles avoided.

In a departure from its traditional foreign policy, Turkey is now becoming an important player in the Middle East. Turkey's growing concern over Kurdish nationalism has brought Ankara closer to the governments of Iran and Syria, which also contend with restive Kurds at home. Although troubling, this shift could be an opportunity for Washington and its allies to use Turkey as a bridge to the Middle East.

Writing in Foreign Affairs, CFR's Ray Takeyh says resuming diplomatic and economic ties with Tehran could bolster Iran's pragmatists and sideline its radicals.

The White House still avoids the label, but by any reasonable historical standard, the Iraqi civil war has begun. The record of past such wars suggests that Washington cannot stop this one -- and that Iraqis will be able to reach a power-sharing deal only after much more fighting, if then. The United States can help bring about a settlement eventually by balancing Iraqi factions from afar, but there is little it can do to avert bloodshed now.