The anticipated American-Iranian deal has an implicit Palestinian/Israeli dimension that could force Tehran to change its political discourse regarding Palestine and Israel, and alter the Iranian regional policy based on compensation -- at least verbally -- for the Arab failures on Palestine.
Legislators supportive of a negotiated solution to the Iran nuclear crisis should recognize the Corker bill for what it is: a dangerously written measure that injects new demands into the negotiations and risks laying the foundation to kill a historic agreement. There are three major tripwires that the bill would impose on a deal.
The more Israel is resented and the more its security needs don't get recognition, the more anxious the Israeli public becomes. Regretfully, once this morbid fear was awakened as a desperate last-minute campaign move, it got the job done.
The belief that the US will effectively pressure the Israeli government to negotiate in good faith is now dead; with it should die the idea that the US must be in charge.
AFP Photo/Jack Gue "Dear friends, against all odds we have achieved a great victory for Likud, for the national camp which is headed by Likud, for o...
In this new American production of the Japanese classic, 47 Republican senators play the roles of the 47 ronin. They too deliberately defy the shogun, played with equanimity by President Obama. But the American ronin are out to kill a policy, not a person.
It carries big ramifications for American politics, the Middle East, and relations between the Islamic world and the West. Most everything will be more inflamed, not least the Iranian nuclear controversy and the future of Palestine. And of course American politics.
American foreign policy is controlled by fools. What else can one conclude from the bipartisan demand that the U.S. intervene everywhere all the time, irrespective of consequences? No matter how disastrous the outcome, the War Lobby insists that the idea was sound. Any problems obviously result, it is claimed, from execution, a matter of doing too little: too few troops engaged, too few foreigners killed, too few nations bombed, too few societies transformed, too few countries occupied, too few years involved, too few dollars spent. As new conflicts rage across the Middle East, the interventionist caucus' dismal record has become increasingly embarrassing.
Five factors guarantee even rougher times ahead for the United States in the Middle East. Individually, they would be only somewhat disruptive; collectively, they are likely to cause major problems for years to come.
Besides all of the drama created by dissolving the Knesset and calling for early elections, what was the point if it more or less leads to the same political situation as before?
Under the new "Cotton doctrine," America's commitments are only good for as long as the president who signed them remains in office. This is the way banana republics do business, not the United States. It's an approach unworthy of our diplomatic traditions, and one that damages our ability to work with other nations.
STOCKHOLM - A breakthrough might compel a phase of intense diplomacy, giving Iran a pathway to diplomatic normalization and opening the door for grand bargains that could begin to restore order and stability to the rest of the region. A breakdown, by contrast, though unlikely to lead immediately to war, could easily foment developments that lead in that direction, and the region as a whole could be pulled even deeper into the current vortex of chaos and violence.
Unfortunately, whoever prevails in 2016 will face an America more bitterly divided than at any time in our recent past. The tangible damage of the right wing's malicious behavior over the last six years is to divide Americans by mainstreaming hate.
Should the next government end up being led by Netanyahu, every Israeli will live to mourn the demise of Israel as a democratic and Jewish state and the home of brave pioneers who made a millennium-long dream a reality.
The Founding Fathers wrote an important role for Congress in foreign policymaking. I just wish some of them would read what their job responsibilities are, and, you know, be constitutional.
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.