With tensions between Iran and the United States de-escalating for now, there is talk about cease-fire agreements in Libya and Idlib.

Since the killing of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and senior Hashd al-Shaabi leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in a U.S. strike at Baghdad airport, the power struggle between the United States and Iran in Iraq has transformed into a hot conflict. Washington's latest move has the potential to irreversibly up the ante in the long-standing hostilities between the two nations.

The killing of Qasem Soleimani and his close associates in an American airstrike in Baghdad Thursday night was without question one of the most significant developments in the Middle East over the last several years – significant in terms of the profile of its target as well as the unexpectedness of such an attack.

A few weeks ago, this column detailed how, in the last two decades, U.S. administrations have periodically made war plans and debated conflict scenarios. Both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations did it, and now the Donald Trump administration has come to a similar point of deliberating a military response against Iran.

Debates and discussions regarding Iran have spanned years in Washington. From the "axis of evil" to "Sunni-Shiite equilibrium" and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to the "maximum pressure" campaign, there have been a variety of different positions and policies offered by the last three administrations in the White House.

Regardless of what coalition forms in Iraq, the new government will face the problem of ensuring political stability, government control over non-government groups and encouraging normalization among different ethnic and sectarian elements

The surprising announcement of a possible meeting between Trump and Kim raises more questions than gives answers

Washington's decision to develop a new Middle East policy geared toward protecting Israel's narrow and ultra-nationalist interests alone created a new trend in regional affairs.

Decision by the U.S. administration and Congress will have a variety of ramifications for politics in the Middle East and U.S. relations with its partners in the nuclear deal. Remember that actions of the U.S. administration will be judged with U.S. actions and inactions that have taken place in recent years in the Middle East.

The arrest of Iranian-Turkish businessman Reza Zerrab in Miami does not give any message as thought by the Turkish opposition - it only shows that a U.S. attorney did his duty

The opening remarks of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who took over the term presidency of the organization, during the summit depicted the expectations of the OIC. His remarks were full of new suggestions to turn the OIC into a genuine association.

Consider this wild scenario: After years of demonizing each other, the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran put their differences behind them. They agree to be strategic partners and sign a document to seal it.

SETA CONFERENCE By  Dr. Kamran Bokhari  Strategic Forecasting Inc. (Stratfor), Director of Middle East Analysis Date: November 8, 2007 Thursday Time: 15.00 - 16.30 Venue: SETA Foundation, Ankara

The West makes an effort to win Iran back because a controllable Iran is the most natural ally of the West in the region.

The crisis in Ukraine is yet another serious test of U.S. leadership in terms of its international alliances, guarantees and assurances.

A successful transition in Iraq towards stability will require meangingful decentralisation, an equitable plan for oil revenue distribution - and a lot of compromise on all sides.

How has the course of history in the US-Iranian relations been? What are the needs of the parties so that they have an urge for a rapprochement? What are the possible implications of a possible rapprochement with regard to the parties, the region and Turkey?