September 2013 Meeting
What Do We Do About Syria?
by Larry P. Goodson
Professor of Middle East Studies at the U.S. Army War College

October 2013 Meeting
Noorjahan Akbar
Working for Gender Equity in Afghanistan





January 23, 2014

The Global Application of Landpower in Support     
of National Interest
Major General Tony Cucolo - 49th 
Commandant of the U.S. Army War College


February 2014 Meeting
Korea - Will it Explode or Implode?
Dr. Frank Plantan, Jr.



March 27th, 2014
The Role of National Intelligence
in the 21st Century
Admiral Dennis Blair




April 24, 2014
The International Drug War
and Implications for Foreign Policy
Moderator - 
Dr. Alan Stolberg



September 25, 2014

Professor Craig Nation U.S. Army War College
Russia, Ukraine & the World


38th Annual International Reception
U.S. Army War College
November 13, 2014

December 11th, 2014


The United States, ISIS, and the War for the Soul of Islam
Professor Larry Goodson




May 28, 2015


September 24, 2015
Terrorism, the West and the ISIS Threat
James Q. Roberts is Office of the Secretary of Defense Chair
and Assistant Professor in the Strategic Leadership Department,
Eisenhower School, National Defense University, Washington, DC.

James Q. Roberts

39th Annual International Fellows Reception
October 22, 2015

December 10, 2015
Middle East History & Solutions

Larry P. Goodson

January 28,  2016
Europe’s Perception of U.S. Foreign Policy


Juliette Tolay, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Political Science

Penn State Harrisburg



March 24, 2016

Extra-Hemispheric Actors in Latin America & the Caribbean
Dr. R. Evan Ellis - U.S. Army War College



Copy of Presentation

April 28, 2016
Africa & the World

Lt. Col. Reda Chaib, Morocco. 
Col. Charles Dalo Nengite, Nigeria




May 19, 2016
North Korea: A Challenge to the World
Dr. Frank Plantan, Jr.


December 15, 2016
Geopolitics of Climate Change
Dr. David Titley


February 23, 2017
Cuba Today & After the Castro Brothers
Senior Fellow - BROOKINGS
Ted Piccone  & Stew Snyder
Scribe- Brittany Fleisher   Ted Piccone   Howard Henderson

March 23, 2017
Alan Stolberg  - FPA PRES. Michele Sellitto -  Brigadier General Peter Zwack


April 27, 2017
South China Sea Geopolitics

Robert Daly



May 18, 2017

DAVID COMMINS – Dickinson College       
The Future of US-Iranian Relations
by Robert Naeye

Scenarios I see are escalation toward military conflict, status quo of tension and management through low level of conflict through proxies, or accommodation – easing of tensions
No way of knowing which scenario is more likely
Points of conflict: Syria   US backs movement to overthrow Assad, Iran a major force to provide military and financial support to Assad
Lebanon – Iran is longtime sponsor of Hezbollah, US supported pro-Western orgs, US views Hezbollah as terrorist and adversary to peace process
US and Iran at odds over Persian Gulf, Iran has sharp rivalry with Saudi Arabia, which supports US, and US has supported Saudis
US concerned about Iranian efforts to destabilize nations on Gulf
Points of accommodation: war against ISIS, which is devoted to slaughtering Shiites. ISIS views Iran as heretical, to be destroyed
It’s a significant point of agreement, since ISIS represents a security threat to both nations
Second point of accommodation: Nuclear agreement, very controversial in both nations, but both nations committed to implementation
Third point: stabilization of Iraq, The US and Iran don’t agree on what a stable Iraq would look like, but would like to see Iraq become a stable nation again. But support different political parties, interests, and visions, but an unstable Iraq is a threat to both countries.
So grounds for conversation. Iran glad to see US overthrow Taliban, since persecuted Shiite minority
One of major concerns: support for Syrian govt, Iranian support for militias in different countries (Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen) – on sides of civil wars that the US opposes. Iran funds and arms militias, but doesn’t have complete control over them
For US to condemn Iran for that manipulation for local conflicts, like pot calling the kettle black.
Both Iran and US adopt sanctimonious pose
The US is worried about Iran’s threat, or appearance of threat, to stability of Arab Gulf states, including Bahrain and Saudi Arabia
Gulf States concerned about Iranian subversion in their countries
The rulers of the Gulf States trample the rights of Shiite citizens, treated like dirt
Monarchies portray rights-based struggles as Iranian subversion, accuse Iran of meddling, the way the US perceived USSR during Cold War
Iranian threat might be overblown
US has military bases surrounding Iran, makes you realize whose a threat to whom. Largest preposition base in world outside US is in Qatar, fifth fleet based in Bahrain, and large bases in Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey
Iranian threat to US is small boats dropping mines in Iraqi coastal waters
Iran doesn’t like fact that US wants to overthrow Assad
Relationship has noting to do with religion or Shiihism, purely strategic relationship that’s beneficial to both nations
US military presence in Iraq makes Iranians very uncomfortable
Hardliners in both countries that would like to escalate tensions
People in Iran think nuclear deal is bad, and want to ditch it
Deep-seated ideological hostility, in their DNA, a political camp of anti-Americanism that doesn’t want to see improvements because it would weaken their standing in Iranian domestic politics
Fear that improving relations with West would lead to growing Western cultural influence in Iran that would diminish their influence
Revolution in 1979 was against Western cultural influence, so ideologues afraid that easing of tensions could lead to backsliding
Hardliners are afraid is what US really wants is to overthrow their govt, and they have reason to suppose that outsiders want to meddle in their politics. 1953 CIA overthrown of prime minister.
Iranians think US is much more capable and clever in foreign affairs
Have pragmatists in Iranian political scene, president Rouhani, want to end Iran’s diplomatic isolation to improve economy.
Iran’s economy hurt by sanctions, but Iran hurts itself too, too much state-dominated, crony capitalism, inefficient. Iranians suffer high unemployment and low income. These want to revive trade with West and US, if US will allow that.
In US, have our own hardliners who think nuclear deal a bad deal, not  unreasonable position. Does not affect ballistic missile program, does not address support for militias, so maintains that Iran gets economic revival but can continue to frustrate Western effort to restabilize Middle East
Not clear cut idea that deal was all gain, but sometimes in diplomacy, a bad deal is better than a worse deal.
Trump said he’d abandon deal, but US has followed through on next stage, and waved sanctions, but added new sanctions for anti-American organizations, but US has not abandoned nuclear deal
Hardliners in both countries want other country to show bad faith so they aren’t the ones who looked like the sabotage the deal
Nuclear deal a good way to tone down any possibility of escalation toward war.
War games show a messy outcome, won’t advance US interests in a clear way. Consensus on both sides is that escalation is to be avoided, but not at all costs, because either side has no idea where it would lead to
Iran – could lead to full scale US invasion and overthrow
US – don’t know if it would be quagmire
So ample caution on both sides
Some say you can just fire Tomahawks and they will cave
That’s an idiotic idea. Khameini and people around him are tough men, they don’t scare and don’t back down
Quick strike against Iran might be gratifying for American public, but don’t see Iranian govt caving under that strike, so wind up with situation that if you don’t strike harder, you back down and lose credibility
Miscalculation, forces not far apart in Gulf, Iraq, and Syria, so escalation is possible, and people on both sides want to see it happen due to crazy optimism
Status quo of tense and unsatisfying situation but most people consider it preferable to escalation and war
Possibility of reset ahs greatest promise for stabilizing Middle East, but depends on domestic politics in Iran and US, but pragmatists don’t dominate in either country
Stalemate in both nations for visions of future, one in Iran likely to go on, no sign of thaw in Iranian politics
SQ is best either side can hope for for now.
Iran had constitutional from 1905-11. Ruler acceded to popular protest and granted constitution in 1906. Royalist powers launched coup and seized capital in 1908, civil war followed.
Howard Baskerville and American missionary in Tabriz, took up arms with constitutional forces, was killed defending the lines
A marker in Tabriz honoring Baskerville
Morgan Schuster, banker who organized treasury department. Russians objected because trade was untaxed, so Russia issued ultimatum to fire Schuster, or Russia would invade. Parliament didn’t want to invade, voted to dismiss him, but Russia invaded anyway.
Other nations besides Israel would feel threatened by Iran nukes
Israel and Saudis have security cooperation
Rev Guard have decisive voice in security matters, have red lines that parliament and president can’t go past, but don’t control everything
These elections are sometimes surprising, not fair and democratic, but outcomes sometimes surprising
Don’t know if counting will be accurate
High percentage of young, hard to say what it portends for future of regime, don’t feel as strongly about history of Ayatollah Khomeini
Don’t have hostile view of US, but Iran not a representative democracy
Time is on US side, see where we stand 10 years
Iranians now having contact with Israelis, don’t hate each other
My own person is look for points of accommodation, ways to avoid conflict, tone down Saudi-Iranian rivalry
US sees itself as supporting Arabs against expansion Iran
Firmly believe in domestic relations, dialog is essential
Hopefully with time, less fearful attitudes of young attitudes of young Iranians toward West will prevail

September 28, 2017

Heather Conley -  Western Europe in a Time of Upheaval



October 2017 Meeting with International Fellows & wife's  in Carlisle





President's Speaker Series


Ambassador Alexander Vershbow

November 30, 2017 - WSCC

January 25, 2018
Ambassador John Craig

The Sunni-Shia Divide


Friends of The Foriegn Policy Association of Harrisburg, PA Inc.

     Frank Matunis,                                     Bob Glasscock,                               Lou Thieblemont,        President Michele Sellitto

February 22, 2018
India - Pakistan Relations

Stuart Snyder,                             Dr. Patrick Bratton,                   Our Dear Scribe,                Col. Mike Phillips,                               Howard Henderson

March 15, 2018
U.S. - Iranian Relations
Dr. Trita Parsi


October  25, 2018
Mexican - U.S. Relations

Alicia Kerber,  Mexican Consul in Philadelphia

November, 2018

Fourth Annual President's Series