Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman claims that the U.S. would subject Palestinians to “severe measures” if they apply to the UN.
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman claims that the U.S. would subject Palestinians to “severe measures” if they apply to the UN.
In his latest book, Knowing Too Much: The American Jewish Romance with Israel is Coming to An End, veteran activist Norman Finkelstein argues that the growing international awareness of the Israeli occupation has heralded a perceptible shift among the U.S. Jewish community away from a close identification with Israel.
The United States should consider taking China up on its four-point peace plan for Syria.
Saad Hariri—the Saudi-born son of the late Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic Hariri—has been on something of a speaking tour lately. The billionaire former prime minister has repeatedly tried to make the case that Lebanon’s incumbent government (read Hezbollah) has put the country in harm’s way because of its stance on the conflict in neighboring Syria. But Hariri may be stoking the sectarian fires himself.
In his first term, President Barack Obama’s vision for the Middle East failed to materialize. If he wants to make a lasting mark during his second term, he must ensure that U.S. policy in the region is no longer dictated by energy sources, friendly dictators, and Israel.
No consulate or embassy is designed to withstand an all-out attack.
It’s the consensus among the pundits: foreign policy doesn’t matter in this presidential election. They point to the ways Republican candidate Mitt Romney has more or less parroted President Barack Obama on just about everything other than military spending and tough talk about another “American century.” The consensus is wrong. There is an issue that matters: Iran.
Two years ago, Turkey was on its way to being a player in Central Asia, a major power broker in the Middle East, and a driving force in international politics. Now it’s at war with one of its neighbors, at odds with regional powers, and plagued by internal insurgency. What happened?
According to the myth of “homeland security,” no matter how much military strength we have or control we exert, there is always “a rising tide of tumult” somewhere that threatens our national security. At every moment, somewhere in the world, we have something crucial to lose. The name of the threat can change with surprising ease. But the peril must always be there. It’s essential to the story. And that story, in turn, is now essential to every presidential contest.
The ease with which we’ve accepted drone attacks bodes ill for the future.