how could the United States dictate to the rest of the world what to do and how to behave while doing the very opposite?
Kazakhstan can offer a much more visible contribution to international peace and prosperity. This country needs to be called upon to play a stronger and more active role in the mediation of interests between the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (E.U.), on one side, and Russia and the Middle East, on the other.
Victims of domestic abuse deserve international protection, and hopefully with more pressure to reform the refugee system and more funding being placed in NGOs, they can receive it.
The fight against the Islamic State has been the major source of discontent in a difficult U.S. -- Turkey relationship. Yet in trying to get Turkey on board on this front, the U.S. risks a setback for its interests in the larger Eastern Mediterranean region.
Following Chuck Hagel's resignation, President Obama has had himself cloned and then chosen that clone, known as Obama II, to become the United States' new Secretary of Defense.
Unlike the interim nuclear deal, the extension appears to lack any clear key terms upon which prospective nuclear talks would be anchored in, or a final nuclear would be reached. By extending the nuclear negotiations, the Obama administration can save face, add to its questionable Middle East achievements.
As Republican pressure grows on a beleaguered president to become even more militarily assertive on a range of global issues from the Ukraine to the Levant, we all need to ask ourselves a few questions.
Though it is clear that Turkey has tacked to a strong wind, Turkey is painfully aware that the American-led effort to arm Kurds against ISIS will accelerate a redefinition of a hundred-year old regional order defined in the detritus of World War One.
John McCain would much rather have been elected president back in 2008, but for a man who was soundly defeated by Obama, being a Shadow President against that very same man is the perhaps the second-best thing that he could have hoped for.
Let's play a game, the kind that makes no sense on this single-superpower planet of ours. For a moment, do your best to suspend disbelief and imagine that there's another superpower, great power, or even regional power somewhere that, between 2001 and 2003, launched two major wars in the Greater Middle East.
We are living in The Neocon Moment, a testament to the foolishness and arrogance of those who believe themselves to be engineers of peoples, societies, and nations. Yet Washington officials have yet to tire of America's permanent state of war.
Behind the forgettable headline of "yet another" attack in Afghanistan is a more interesting reality: southeastern Pashtun tribes love sports and have been quietly making a public space for sporting events in areas where the Taliban still routinely fight for control with government forces.
The focus of our strategy should not be on what we do or do not do with our military. The principal focus of our "fight" should be on getting the countries in the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan, Bahrain, etc., to make the defeat of ISIS their responsibility.
Despite the rhetoric of Republicans, by historical standards, Obama is a practitioner of militaristic activism.
I've long resisted the facile argument that there is a fundamental divide in Latin America -- left/right, vegetarian/carnivore, illiberal/liberal, etc. The pairings sometimes offer an easily digestible soundbite, but they reinforce tendentiousness of rhetoric, argument, politics and policies.
Currently, the US and Western allies' major campaign in the Middle East is fighting the Islamic State while ignoring to address Iran's military engagements in other countries, ignoring Tehran's determination for regional supremacy seriously.