There are compelling reasons for updating and tightening the Action Plan, most notably the need to halt nuclear weapons modernization, adopt metrics to gauge progress, and improve cooperation between parties.
The controversy surrounding the Washington football team name is in some ways a bellwether. Americans do not know enough about our shared history even to be properly offended at the lack of an inclusive narrative that illuminates the history of this continent in all of its complexity.
The complex legal history of the federal government's connection to Native American tribes was on display in separate events last week, neither shining a positive light on this continuum of American history, but both sowing the seeds for a more positive future.
Whether you care about stopping climate change, getting rid of nuclear weapons, ending genocide or support human rights for all, it is past time to acknowledge and stop our self-destructive war on international law.
Despite the centrality of international law to the ongoing crisis, there has been remarkably little substantive discussion regarding the precise conventions, norms, and principles of international law at issue.
Imagine a very different Constitution -- one where Congress could kill any state law, where a twenty-six member Senate controlled treaty-making with other nations, and where the president's veto was exercised jointly with the Supreme Court.
Backhanded handling with imposed leadership structures throughout the world may be a sad necessity for democracies; comprehensive agreements with concrete commitments including the ceding of land is downright irresponsibly dangerous.