The larger question facing our nation about the U.S. role in the world and how the candidates themselves would define what is in the national security interest of the United States was almost completely ignored.
Meanwhile, “Yugonostalgia” has been all the rage among a certain class of cognoscenti over the last few years.
As he did in the first two debates, GOP candidate Mitt Romney reversed himself on a number of extreme right-wing positions he had taken earlier in a desperate effort to depict himself as a moderate. At the same time, Obama’s hawkish stances served as yet another reminder of just how far to the right Obama has evolved since running as an anti-war candidate just four years ago.
Having “lost” Egypt and Tunisia already, the United States wasn’t inclined to take anything but the most tepid of steps in support of Bahrain’s protestors.
As chief prosecutor of the Yugoslav and Rwandan tribunals Carla Del Ponte found herself struggling uphill against institutional indifference and opposition.
He felt that, as a friend to Israel, he was obliged to tell them to discontinue engaging in acts that were both immoral and threatened its own self-interest.
The Wehrmacht only objected to the Third Reich’s policies of extermination when it looked like it might suffer the repercussions.
In the interest of keeping vital global issues in the discussion, Foreign Policy in Focus reached out to scholars at the Institute for Policy Studies—our institutional home—to sketch out progressive perspectives on the world issues we don’t expect to get fair treatment in the debates between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. Without an informed citizenry, these crucial topics will always fall by the wayside. So read up, and share widely!
Bendjedid was used, abused and then basically discarded when his services were no longer needed.
The Orthodox church and the Islamic community were united in opposition to Gay Pride week in Serbia.