The United States should certainly maintain its commitment to Israelâs legitimate security needs. What needs to be questioned is the Clinton administrationâs support for Israelâs ongoing occupation and its violations of basic human rights.
Despite years of UN-bashing in Washington, the global organization remains one of the most popular institutions among U.S. voters.
President Clinton's September 1st decision to delay deployment of the Pentagon's proposed National Missile Defense (NMD) system is an example of good policy and good politics.
One progressive's recount of the Republican National Convention.
The U.S. must recognize that preventive actions -- diplomacy, contributing to global economic development, promoting political and religious freedom -- that get to the root causes of conflict are the long-term paths to global peace and stability.
It is highly unlikely that the upcoming summit between the United States, Israel, and Palestine at Camp David will the kind of positive results that came from the 1978 summit between the United States, Israel, and Egypt.
Before we can gauge how Cheney might perform as vice president, we will need a much more vigorous and detailed foreign policy debate than either Al Gore or George Bush have offered thus far.
The problem with Clinton's view of Jerusalem is ultimately not a bias towards Israel, but a direct challenge to the authority of the United Nations and some of the most basic tenets of international law.
Late last month, President Clinton announced the Defense Trade Security Initiative, the most significant loosening of arms-export controls since the end of the Cold War.
What is news is that the heating of our atmosphere has propelled our climate into a new state of instability.