Diplomacy

While it is far too early to predict an imminent solution, some guarded optimism seems justified that progress on the nuclear standoff with Iran may finally be obtainable.

Pakistan cannot afford to live in international political isolation, and it needs to have an active role and vested interest in securing the safety and sustainability of Afghanistan. An uncooperative, nuclear Pakistan risks instability and violence in the Af-Pak border region.

The degree to which Chen Guangcheng has put the planet's two most powerful nations in uncomfortable positions and forced a delicate diplomatic dance reflects, in part, the rising power of activists and protesters.

While Congress fights over tax policy and the budget, it should take a moment to fix its sanctions legislation and return the power to make peace back to the president.

While officials convened at the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena earlier this month, the White House put the finishing touches on another free trade agreement. The deal has faced vocal resistance from labor and human rights groups in both countries.

Brazil's financial markets and domestic policies may feel some unexpected turbulence being dragged into the slipstream of President Obama's presidential election campaign.

The challenges Libya faces are not just about uniting a fractured society. They are also about building responsive and accountable governance institutions out of the ashes of the skeletal ministries left behind.

If Iran and the U.S. are unable to build positive sum political space and the mutual spin becomes a vicious cycle, the negotiations could easily spin into failure.

Driven by limited political maneuverability at home, domestic pressure not to compromise, and a perception of strength, the nuclear talks have often been about imposing terms of capitulation on the other. It has never succeeded.

For foreign policy strategists, cultural diplomacy has great value as a trust-builder, providing groundwork on which broader, non-arts initiatives can be constructed.

On Syria, there is a back-story from which the US should learn, lest it be repeated again. For years, long before the killing by President Bashar al-Assad's government began, the US preferred a policy with Damascus of disengagement. It is unclear why the White House pursued this.

We're at a rare moment in which both the United States and Iran have unclenched their fists and appear ready for real talks. But we've seen how opportunities have been sabotaged in the past by political opportunism, ultimatums and intransigence from factions on each side.

If we spoke to the Soviets at the most tense moment of the 20th century, we should be able to have channels of communication with Iran now.

There is no logical reason why we cannot address the regime's nuclear energy goals simultaneously with the country's appalling human rights conditions, which violate every imaginable facet of basic human liberties.

Largely missing from the recent political debate, until now, has been a full-throated defense of diplomatic engagement with Iran towards negotiated agreements that would resolve or mitigate international concerns about its disputed nuclear program.

As the Arab Spring continues, Western influence wanes. In tandem, Israel is becoming more isolated.

Xi Jinping's visit underscores the desire for the Chinese to maintain strong relations with the U.S., but his choice of cities also underscores his sympathies for the common man.

If the reports are accurate, then what Lieberman and Graham seek to do is block the president from pursuing a goal that knowledgeable American and European officials say is the "most attainable outcome."