Now that Barack Obama has expressed bomber's remorse in Libya, curious minds want to know: Does Hillary Clinton still believe that NATO's "no-fly zone" in Libya was "smart power at its best"?
There is much about Donald Trump that deserves to be criticized. On foreign policy, however, his at times unsophisticated formulations reflect far greater common sense than possessed by his political opponents and establishment critics.
The coming week is poised to see significant shifts in the Yemeni, Libya, and Syrian issues midwifed by the three UN envoys in charge of searching for political solutions to these conflicts, in which many local, regional, and international factors overlap and interact.
Can the Middle East be stabilized and if so what role should the United States and its allies play in doing so?
War-making is one area where there are few complaints about President Obama acting upon a very broad interpretation of executive authority that at times stretches the law and the Constitution beyond recognition.
The U.S.-led Western nations should realize that they have made a mess of Libya and can only compound the problem with more military meddling.
This week we begin a two part series on a post-ISIS Middle East. In Part I we look at "The Middle East after ISIS." Next week, in Part II, we examine whether a post-ISIS Middle East can be stabilized and what role, if any, the U.S. and its allies can play.
The slaughter of Middle Eastern Christians and other persecuted faiths is one of the great tragedies of our age. The Knights/IDC report helps bring the Islamic State's many crimes to life. There is no panacea, no easy solution to the ongoing conflict. But Americans can act even when their government cannot.
Clinton's penchant for interventionism has contributed to destabilizing the Middle East and North Africa, creating ideal conditions for ISIS to grow and thrive. In this sense, she really did "help create ISIS."
Iranians recently voted for a new parliament as well as Assembly of Experts, tasked with choosing the successor to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Moderate reformers did well in both bodies, vindicating the Obama administration's decision to try diplomacy after years of confrontation.
In recent times, one of the strangest aspects of war, American-style, has been the inability of the most powerful military on the planet to extricate itself from any of the conflicts it's initiated or somehow gotten itself involved in -- even those it's officially walked away from.
In the decades since the draft ended in 1973, a strange new military has emerged in the United States. Think of it, if you will, as a post-democratic force that prides itself on its warrior ethos rather than the old-fashioned citizen-soldier ideal.
On March 17, China and the Islamic Republic of Gambia signed a communique to resume diplomatic ties, effective immediately. China and Gambia, ...
Intervention at this sensitive moment, even if it focused on a systematic campaign against ISIS, would probably irreparably fracture the peace-building process by injecting more violence into an already violent situation.
Yet again Washington is only doing what it has done before. Unfortunately, the same policy will yield the same result as before. It is time to try something different.
All Democrats should worry because her major policy and character flaws could leave us with a Republican president this fall. Here's why.