Wikivahdat - Recent changes [en]

Template:Main page/First featured article

Peysepar — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 11:09:00 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 19 April 2026
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:~~Islamic Ecumenism in the 20th Century~~.jpg\|thumb\|]]		[[File:Quincy_Institute_for_Responsible_Statecraft.jpg \|thumb\|right\|Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft]]
	'''Islamic Ecumenism in the 20th Century: The Azhar and Shiism between Rapprochement and Restraint''' is a 2004 academic monograph by German historian of Islam [[Rainer Brunner]]. Published by [[Brill Publishers]], the book examines twentieth-century efforts at [[Sunni–Shia relations\|~~Sunni–Shiʿi rapprochement~~]] (''taqrīb'') with a particular focus on [[Al-Azhar University]] and its engagement with [[Twelver Shiʿism]]. The study is widely regarded as a foundational work in the field of modern intra-Islamic relations.

	~~The book analyzes theological debates~~, ~~institutional initiatives~~, ~~and political contexts~~ that ~~shaped ecumenical discourse between Sunni and Shiʿi scholars from the late nineteenth century through the latter half of the twentieth century~~.		A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States\|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026 (Lobe, 2026).[[Alleged Role of U.S. Think Tanks in Promoting Military Action Against Iran: A Report\|'''Continue ...''']]</span>
	~~<span id="mp~~-~~more">~~[[~~Islamic Ecumenism~~ in the ~~20th Century: The Azhar and Shiism between Rapprochement and Restraint~~ (~~Book review~~)\|'''Continue ...''']]</span>

Alleged Role of U.S. Think Tanks in Promoting Military Action Against Iran: A Report

Peysepar — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 10:38:48 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:08, 19 April 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[File:Quincy_Institute_for_Responsible_Statecraft.jpg \|thumb\|right\|Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft]]
	A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States\|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026 (Lobe, 2026).		A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States\|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026 (Lobe, 2026).

Line 40:		Line 41:

	[https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ Original article at Responsible Statecraft]		[https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ Original article at Responsible Statecraft]

			[[Category:English Wikivahdat]]
			[[category:Think tanks]]

Bruegel

Peysepar — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 09:37:25 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:07, 19 April 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 128:		Line 128:

	Commission complementary research: Use Bruegel’s macro-level analysis as a foundation, but commission targeted, micro-level studies to understand local impacts before implementing broad reforms, particularly in socially sensitive areas.		Commission complementary research: Use Bruegel’s macro-level analysis as a foundation, but commission targeted, micro-level studies to understand local impacts before implementing broad reforms, particularly in socially sensitive areas.

			==References==

			[[Category:English Wikivahdat]]
			[[category:Think tanks]]

Alleged Role of U.S. Think Tanks in Promoting Military Action Against Iran: A Report

Peysepar — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 09:28:27 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:58, 19 April 2026
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States\|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026~~.<ref name="Lobe2026">{{cite web \|last=~~Lobe ~~\|first=Jim \|title=Blame these think tanks for the Iran War \|url=https://responsiblestatecraft~~.~~org/iran-war-think-tanks/ \|website=Responsible Statecraft \|publisher=Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft \|date=2026-04-14 \|access-date=2026-04-19}}</ref>~~		A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States\|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026 (Lobe, 2026).
	According to the report, four different [[Artificial intelligence\|AI]] programs ([[Gemini (chatbot)\|Gemini]], [[ChatGPT]], [[Claude (language model)\|Claude]], and [[Grok (chatbot)\|Grok]]) identified the '''[[Foundation for Defense of Democracies]] (FDD)''', the '''[[American Enterprise Institute]] (AEI)''', the '''[[Hudson Institute]]''', the '''[[Washington Institute for Near East Policy]] (WINEP)''', and the '''[[Heritage Foundation]]''' as among the most prominent institutions advocating military action against Iran between July 1, 2025, and February 27, 2026.~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~
			According to the report, four different [[Artificial intelligence\|AI]] programs ([[Gemini (chatbot)\|Gemini]], [[ChatGPT]], [[Claude (language model)\|Claude]], and [[Grok (chatbot)\|Grok]]) identified the '''[[Foundation for Defense of Democracies]] (FDD)''', the '''[[American Enterprise Institute]] (AEI)''', the '''[[Hudson Institute]]''', the '''[[Washington Institute for Near East Policy]] (WINEP)''', and the '''[[Heritage Foundation]]''' as among the most prominent institutions advocating military action against Iran between July 1, 2025, and February 27, 2026 (Lobe, 2026).

	=== Think tanks identified ===		=== Think tanks identified ===
	The AI models ranked FDD as the most prominent war promoter. The report noted that FDD's original 2001 [[IRS]] filing described its mission as "providing education to enhance [[Israel]]'s image in [[North America]] and the public’s understanding of issues affecting Israeli-Arab relations.~~"<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~
	The Heritage Foundation, which identifies with an "[[America First (policy)\|America First]]" foreign policy, published a report in March 20025 [sic; likely 2025] calling for a "strategic partnership" with Israel. The other three think tanks (AEI, Hudson, WINEP) were described as falling into the [[Neoconservatism\|neoconservative]] camp, with support for Israel as a central principle.~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~		The AI models ranked FDD as the most prominent war promoter. The report noted that FDD's original 2001 [[IRS]] filing described its mission as "providing education to enhance [[Israel]]'s image in [[North America]] and the public’s understanding of issues affecting Israeli-Arab relations" (Lobe, 2026).
	Other think tanks cited by at least one AI model included the '''[[Jewish Institute for National Security of America]] (JINSA)''', the '''[[Center for Security Policy]] (CSP)''', the '''[[Institute for the Study of War]] (ISW)''', the '''[[Center for Strategic and International Studies]] (CSIS)''', and the '''[[Atlantic Council]]'''. According to Claude, ISW's "framing of Iranian threats consistently supported the case for military actions." ChatGPT noted that CSIS and the Atlantic Council had "mixed views internally" but that some fellows supported military strikes.~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~
			The Heritage Foundation, which identifies with an "[[America First (policy)\|America First]]" foreign policy, published a report in March 20025 [sic; likely 2025] calling for a "strategic partnership" with Israel. The other three think tanks (AEI, Hudson, WINEP) were described as falling into the [[Neoconservatism\|neoconservative]] camp, with support for Israel as a central principle (Lobe, 2026).

			Other think tanks cited by at least one AI model included the '''[[Jewish Institute for National Security of America]] (JINSA)''', the '''[[Center for Security Policy]] (CSP)''', the '''[[Institute for the Study of War]] (ISW)''', the '''[[Center for Strategic and International Studies]] (CSIS)''', and the '''[[Atlantic Council]]'''. According to Claude, ISW's "framing of Iranian threats consistently supported the case for military actions." ChatGPT noted that CSIS and the Atlantic Council had "mixed views internally" but that some fellows supported military strikes (Lobe, 2026).

	=== Comparison with Iraq War advocacy ===		=== Comparison with Iraq War advocacy ===
	All four AI models found a significant overlap between the think tanks that promoted the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]] and those identified as promoting war with Iran. The report highlighted the role of [[Richard Perle]] (dubbed the "Prince of Darkness" of AEI), who served on advisory boards of FDD, WINEP, Hudson, CSP, and JINSA, and was a signatory of the 1997 '''[[Project for the New American Century]] (PNAC)'''. PNAC included future [[George W. Bush administration]] officials such as [[Dick Cheney]], [[Donald Rumsfeld]], [[Paul Wolfowitz]], and [[Elliott Abrams]].~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~
	According to Grok, "the same networks drove both campaigns two decades apart." The report noted that after the Iraq War became unpopular, neoconservatives such as [[Douglas Feith]] and [[Scooter Libby]] moved to the Hudson Institute, and FDD effectively became "the successor-vehicle for the Iraq War neoconservative network, rebranded and refocused on Iran.~~"<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~		All four AI models found a significant overlap between the think tanks that promoted the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]] and those identified as promoting war with Iran. The report highlighted the role of [[Richard Perle]] (dubbed the "Prince of Darkness" of AEI), who served on advisory boards of FDD, WINEP, Hudson, CSP, and JINSA, and was a signatory of the 1997 '''[[Project for the New American Century]] (PNAC)'''. PNAC included future [[George W. Bush administration]] officials such as [[Dick Cheney]], [[Donald Rumsfeld]], [[Paul Wolfowitz]], and [[Elliott Abrams]] (Lobe, 2026).

			According to Grok, "the same networks drove both campaigns two decades apart." The report noted that after the Iraq War became unpopular, neoconservatives such as [[Douglas Feith]] and [[Scooter Libby]] moved to the Hudson Institute, and FDD effectively became "the successor-vehicle for the Iraq War neoconservative network, rebranded and refocused on Iran" (Lobe, 2026).

	=== Methods and limitations ===		=== Methods and limitations ===
	The AI models were asked to identify the ten U.S. think tanks most prominent in print, broadcast, online, and social media in promoting a U.S. attack on Iran during the specified period. Each AI defined "prominence" differently – for example, ChatGPT used "most consistently visible," while Grok ranked only those whose experts dominated [[United States Congress\|congressional]] testimony and media appearances. Grok identified only six think tanks, noting that prominence dropped sharply after the top tier.~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~
	The report's author, Jim Lobe, is a contributing editor of ''Responsible Statecraft'' and formerly served as chief of the [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]] bureau of [[Inter Press Service]]. The report was published by the [[Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft]], which advocates a non-interventionist U.S. foreign policy.~~<ref name="Lobe2026" />~~		The AI models were asked to identify the ten U.S. think tanks most prominent in print, broadcast, online, and social media in promoting a U.S. attack on Iran during the specified period. Each AI defined "prominence" differently – for example, ChatGPT used "most consistently visible," while Grok ranked only those whose experts dominated [[United States Congress\|congressional]] testimony and media appearances. Grok identified only six think tanks, noting that prominence dropped sharply after the top tier (Lobe, 2026).

			The report's author, Jim Lobe, is a contributing editor of ''Responsible Statecraft'' and formerly served as chief of the [[Washington, D.C.\|Washington]] bureau of [[Inter Press Service]]. The report was published by the [[Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft]], which advocates a non-interventionist U.S. foreign policy (Lobe, 2026).

	== See also ==		== See also ==
	• [[United States and state-sponsored terrorism]]
	• [[Iran–United States relations]]		[[United States and state-sponsored terrorism]]
	• [[Neoconservatism in the United States]]
	• [[Criticism of the Iraq War]]		[[Iran–United States relations]]

			[[Neoconservatism in the United States]]

			[[Criticism of the Iraq War]]

	== References ==		== References ==
	~~<references~~ />
	== External ~~links~~ ==		Lobe, J. (2026, April 14). ''Blame these think tanks for the Iran War''. Responsible Statecraft. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/
	• [https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ Original article at Responsible Statecraft]
			== External link ==

			[https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ Original article at Responsible Statecraft]

Alleged Role of U.S. Think Tanks in Promoting Military Action Against Iran: A Report

Peysepar — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 09:22:06 GMT

Created page with "A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several Washington-based think tanks played a prominent role in promoting U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026.<ref name="Lobe2026">{{cite web |last=Lobe |first=Jim |title=Blame these think tanks for the Iran War |url=https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-..."

New page

A report published by ''Responsible Statecraft'' on April 14, 2026, alleged that several [[Washington, D.C.|Washington]]-based [[think tank]]s played a prominent role in promoting [[United States|U.S.]]-[[Israel]]i military action against [[Iran]] in the months leading up to a conflict that began on February 28, 2026.<ref name="Lobe2026">{{cite web |last=Lobe |first=Jim |title=Blame these think tanks for the Iran War |url=https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ |website=Responsible Statecraft |publisher=Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft |date=2026-04-14 |access-date=2026-04-19}}</ref>
According to the report, four different [[Artificial intelligence|AI]] programs ([[Gemini (chatbot)|Gemini]], [[ChatGPT]], [[Claude (language model)|Claude]], and [[Grok (chatbot)|Grok]]) identified the '''[[Foundation for Defense of Democracies]] (FDD)''', the '''[[American Enterprise Institute]] (AEI)''', the '''[[Hudson Institute]]''', the '''[[Washington Institute for Near East Policy]] (WINEP)''', and the '''[[Heritage Foundation]]''' as among the most prominent institutions advocating military action against Iran between July 1, 2025, and February 27, 2026.<ref name="Lobe2026" />
=== Think tanks identified ===
The AI models ranked FDD as the most prominent war promoter. The report noted that FDD's original 2001 [[IRS]] filing described its mission as "providing education to enhance [[Israel]]'s image in [[North America]] and the public’s understanding of issues affecting Israeli-Arab relations."<ref name="Lobe2026" />
The Heritage Foundation, which identifies with an "[[America First (policy)|America First]]" foreign policy, published a report in March 20025 [sic; likely 2025] calling for a "strategic partnership" with Israel. The other three think tanks (AEI, Hudson, WINEP) were described as falling into the [[Neoconservatism|neoconservative]] camp, with support for Israel as a central principle.<ref name="Lobe2026" />
Other think tanks cited by at least one AI model included the '''[[Jewish Institute for National Security of America]] (JINSA)''', the '''[[Center for Security Policy]] (CSP)''', the '''[[Institute for the Study of War]] (ISW)''', the '''[[Center for Strategic and International Studies]] (CSIS)''', and the '''[[Atlantic Council]]'''. According to Claude, ISW's "framing of Iranian threats consistently supported the case for military actions." ChatGPT noted that CSIS and the Atlantic Council had "mixed views internally" but that some fellows supported military strikes.<ref name="Lobe2026" />
=== Comparison with Iraq War advocacy ===
All four AI models found a significant overlap between the think tanks that promoted the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]] and those identified as promoting war with Iran. The report highlighted the role of [[Richard Perle]] (dubbed the "Prince of Darkness" of AEI), who served on advisory boards of FDD, WINEP, Hudson, CSP, and JINSA, and was a signatory of the 1997 '''[[Project for the New American Century]] (PNAC)'''. PNAC included future [[George W. Bush administration]] officials such as [[Dick Cheney]], [[Donald Rumsfeld]], [[Paul Wolfowitz]], and [[Elliott Abrams]].<ref name="Lobe2026" />
According to Grok, "the same networks drove both campaigns two decades apart." The report noted that after the Iraq War became unpopular, neoconservatives such as [[Douglas Feith]] and [[Scooter Libby]] moved to the Hudson Institute, and FDD effectively became "the successor-vehicle for the Iraq War neoconservative network, rebranded and refocused on Iran."<ref name="Lobe2026" />
=== Methods and limitations ===
The AI models were asked to identify the ten U.S. think tanks most prominent in print, broadcast, online, and social media in promoting a U.S. attack on Iran during the specified period. Each AI defined "prominence" differently – for example, ChatGPT used "most consistently visible," while Grok ranked only those whose experts dominated [[United States Congress|congressional]] testimony and media appearances. Grok identified only six think tanks, noting that prominence dropped sharply after the top tier.<ref name="Lobe2026" />
The report's author, Jim Lobe, is a contributing editor of ''Responsible Statecraft'' and formerly served as chief of the [[Washington, D.C.|Washington]] bureau of [[Inter Press Service]]. The report was published by the [[Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft]], which advocates a non-interventionist U.S. foreign policy.<ref name="Lobe2026" />
== See also ==
• [[United States and state-sponsored terrorism]]
• [[Iran–United States relations]]
• [[Neoconservatism in the United States]]
• [[Criticism of the Iraq War]]
== References ==
<references />
== External links ==
• [https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-war-think-tanks/ Original article at Responsible Statecraft]