Alliances of convenience are the staple of foreign policy as any reader of Machiavelli knows. Obama wants a deal over Iranian nuclear capabilities for it would be a major success of US foreign policy.
Tell me again: Whose side are we on this time? ...
Could this latest stunt hint at leadership struggles within the GOP? It's an ironic possibility when you consider that the GOP takeover of both houses in January was supposed to herald an era of strong and responsible Republican leadership, not division.
In looking for more images that tell a story we may find ourselves forced to dig deeper and our writing may get better, too. It may also make news and opinion writing more fulfilling and representative. After all, what haven't we said already?
Academics and political junkies will probably breeze through Is the American Century Over? But the book is so well-written and accessible, general readers are likely to find it engaging and insightful as well.
Winning this debate could be crucial given the recent HuffPost/YouGov poll that found more Americans think the 2016 presidential election will focus on foreign policy issues than domestic issues. Historically speaking, this is unlikely; elections almost always turn on the economy and domestic issues. But if the polls prove prophetic, it gives the GOP the advantage. Maybe.
The BDSP is based on a bedrock belief in how America should work: that the only strength that really matters is military and that a great country is one with the capacity to beat the bejesus out of everyone else.
Reports emerged in the American media Thursday that President Obama may propose a resolution to the UN Security Council calling for the lifting of international sanctions on Iran, if an agreement is reached by the "P5+1" negotiating team over the country's nuclear program.
At the risk of oversimplification, sometimes we just need to focus on the overriding big picture rather than all of the extenuating circumstances. In this case the big picture is clear. Containing Iran's agenda of political Shiism is just as crucial as containing Salafist jihadist violence.
The Iran issue highlights a central dilemma of U.S. foreign policy: will political division undermine U.S. world leadership?
The GOP domestic-policy vacuum is evidence of a deeper problem: Republicans don't have a plan to move America forward.
The United States must come up with a strategy to deal with many Middle East developments rather than wasting time, energy and resources in senseless political bickering back home like we saw over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit last week.
While politics may not have ever truly stopped at the water's edge, it is now clear that there are no longer any issues -- even those related to the national security and well-being of the United States -- that cannot be politicized.
Reese Erlich is a foreign correspondent with GlobalPost and reports regularly for National Public Radio (NPR), the Canadian Broadcast Corporation (CBC), and Radio Deutsche Welle. His reporting has earned him multiple awards over the years.
The main thing that a comparison of the fight against ISIS and Boko Haram, both regional threats in oil producing areas, should tell us: If foreign countries know that the U.S. superpower will save the day, they understandably have little incentive to put out much of an effort.
Policy intellectuals -- eggheads presuming to instruct the mere mortals who actually run for office -- are a blight on the republic. Like some invasive species, they infest present-day Washington, where their presence strangles common sense and has brought to the verge of extinction the simple ability to perceive reality. A benign appearance -- well-dressed types testifying before Congress, pontificating in print and on TV, or even filling key positions in the executive branch -- belies a malign impact. Do we really need that chatter? Does it enhance the quality of U.S. policy? If policy/defense/action intellectuals fell silent would America be less secure? Let me propose an experiment. Put them on furlough. Send them back to school for reeducation. Let's see if we are able to make do without them even for a month or two.