While business and trade promotion may not correspond to our desire for bald action in favor of democracy and human rights, they do, however, represent a fundamental step toward them. But most of all -- differently from bombs -- they can contribute to restore the US's most powerful tool of all: its international moral leverage.
The Chinese may be authoritarians and the Americans may be more pluralistic, but China does have legitimate security concerns, and the U.S. military is in China's face, not vice versa.
Two new American generals have been summoned to oversee military training efforts in Iraq. Each will, in due course, be called upon to testify before Congress as to the progress they are making in their mission. Neither will earn an additional star if he reports back that his charges are militarily incapable of achieving the optimistic objectives set forth by the Obama administration. Congress can anticipate that each of these men, and any others they call upon to testify, will provide them with the sort of pat answers one has come to expect from such hearings. But void of meaningful political change in both Iraq and within the political leadership of the "Free Syrian Army," there will be no cause in either of those countries worthy of the sacrifice of the men America plans to train to fight in the spring offensive of 2015.
You can call it a "wave," a "thumpin'," or a "shellacking," but whatever term that the pundits and politicians use, it's quite clear that the Republican Party made a loud statement on Election Night.
The 1.8 million Palestinians who make Gaza their home are calling for help from anyone that is willing to hear them. What they need is not only a roof to live under, but, more importantly, a horizon that can give them hope for the future.
The U.S. is once again intervening in the Middle East with no plan, no idea, no clue and no thinking about how to shape this into a positive outcome.
A sea change in the composition of the Congress is always taken to have profound consequences for American foreign policy. Those expectations usually prove exaggerated. The broad consensus on the basic premises of the country's external relations is too strong to permit stark confrontations.
While gaining control of Congress sounds good to the Republicans on paper, I suspect that 24 months from now, when the presidential election is upon us, they'll be regretting having taken the helm on foreign policy.
There is an undercurrent of thinking in foreign policy circles that a restrained, less actively engaged approach to the country's external relations may best conform to American national interests and capabilities.
We cannot lose sight on how pivotal it is for American foreign policy establishment to resist the influence of foreign elements and special interest groups that tend to benefit from similar circumstances.
On Halloween night, the European Commission -- Europe's "executive" -- changed. At the helm of foreign policy, Lady PESC -- as Catherine Ashton was known -- gave way to Mrs PESC, as Federica Mogherini prefers to be called. Two different women leaders, two leadership styles in foreign policy.
Because of their lesser interest in foreign policy, the American people are not isolationists. They are simply open-minded, subject to persuasion by their political leaders.
Technology is a pathway to knowledge, and it is knowledge that will ultimately curb extremism and promote pluralism in the region.
Whether you love him or hate him, Rand Paul is succeeding in doing something that other Republican candidates have not done in a very long time: broaden the foreign policy debate within the Republican Party in order to encompass a growing libertarian streak among younger Americans.
There have been rumors about Khamenei's health conditions for several years. Nevertheless, in the last few weeks, more and more images of Iran's Supreme Leader are emerging, reflecting his fragile and weak physical condition.
If Israel continues to go down its present very narrow and rigid definition of security it may achieve that particular ambition, but at the expense of all of those other crucial interests, needs, and goals of the Zionist project.