Crown Center teach-in discusses the United States, Israel, Iran and the Middle East at war

On March 11, the Crown Center for Middle East Studies hosted a teach-in to analyze the ongoing Middle East conflict, with six Crown Center scholars sharing perspectives on military developments, Iranian domestic politics, Israel’s strategic aims, and the war’s economic consequences.

“Crown Center teach-in discusses the United States, Israel, Iran and the Middle East at war The teach-in, led by scholars and professors, provided various insights and perspectives on the unfolding situation in the Middle East”

The Justice

The event aimed to help the Brandeis community understand the geopolitical implications of the conflict.

The Justice

Five speakers—Prof. Shai Feldman, Prof. Naghmeh Sohrabi, Prof. Nader Habibi, Prof. Elizabeth Derderian, and Dr. Kerem Ussakl—joined Prof. Gary Samore, who opened the session.

Samore described the discussion as focused on the Israeli-American war against Iran, which is entering the 12th day at the cost of about 1,800 lives and considerable property damage, especially in Iran and Lebanon, and outlined concerns about the military campaign’s successes and the ambiguity of U.S. war objectives.

Panelists offered analyses of how the conflict is unfolding from different angles.

Samore argued that the U.S. and Israel have achieved notable military effects, including damaging Iran’s leadership and air defenses and striking targets tied to the IRGC, while Iran retains some capacity to attack U.S. bases with drones and missiles.

The Justice

He outlined three possible U.S. objectives: regime change, pursuing a Venezuela-model replacement of the Supreme Leader, and the possibility that Trump could declare the war over.

Sohrabi emphasized that Iran operates as a system that protects itself and adapts, distinguishing between government, state, and system to explain domestic dynamics and the continuity of the Islamic Republic through leadership changes.

Feldman outlined Israel’s aims as downgrading or eliminating Iran’s nuclear capacity, degrading Iran’s missile forces and the Axis of Resistance, and, for Prime Minister Netanyahu, pursuing regime change.

He linked these objectives to past events such as the Iran-Contra affair and noted drivers including the Holocaust memory and the October 7 attack.

Habibi discussed the economic implications of the conflict and shared his perspective on how oil and natural gas markets have changed globally amid the ongoing war.

“Crown Center teach-in discusses the United States, Israel, Iran and the Middle East at war The teach-in, led by scholars and professors, provided various insights and perspectives on the unfolding situation in the Middle East”

The Justice

He noted that the Persian Gulf region is a major supplier of both oil and natural gas, which has affected Europe and Asia, and that India and China depend on Hormuz trade for about 40% of their supply.

He warned that there will be both short- and long-term global implications, including inflation and potential stagflation if the conflict continues.

He also discussed how economic pressure could influence U.S. decision-making, suggesting the growing pressure might push the United States either to rapidly escalate military operations or to declare some kind of victory and substantially de-escalate.

Derderian described the war’s effect on Gulf populations, citing reports of about 20 missiles intercepted daily over UAE airspace and Americans facing travel difficulties; she noted Gulf governments’ focus on pacifying their publics and the potential political cost in U.S.-Gulf ties.

Ussakl added that Iraq sits at the regional center of the conflict as a major oil producer whose benefits from oil wealth are not widely shared; he warned energy shortages could destabilize Iraq ahead of summer elections, especially given the lack of a formed government and ongoing regional tensions.

In the second half, audience questions addressed strategic questions.

Samore explained that Iran could still threaten ships at Hormuz with short-range anti-ship missiles and that Iran would likely rely on attrition learned from the Iran-Iraq War.

The Justice

On a ground invasion, Ussakl judged it unlikely given Gulf states’ limited capacity to assist and Turkey’s current anti-war stance.

The session closed with further questions about the potential political, economic, and humanitarian consequences of the conflict.