The organization is under U.S. sanctions, caught between a need to change and a refusal to do so.
Mohamad Fawaz
{
"authors": [
"Matthew Rojansky"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "russia",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Caucasus",
"Russia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
The third presidential debate lacked a strategic vision for U.S. foreign policy toward Russia and China.
Source: National Interest

On Russia, the candidates practiced pure political hyperbole, with the president portraying Romney as stuck in a Cold War mindset and Romney in turn blasting Obama as naive in offering Putin “flexibility.” Though Romney bemoaned Russia’s rejection of U.S. nonproliferation assistance and Obama suggested he had won Russian backing for crippling Iran sanctions, neither explained how he would get relations with Russia back on track after the past year of dramatic decline.
China was mentioned, predictably, as an unfair economic competitor but also as a potential partner for dealing with global challenges. Given China’s overwhelming indifference to the issues of Middle East democracy, Iran and terrorism that dominated much of the debate, it would have been useful to hear at least a few ideas about how to engage China as a responsible stakeholder in international security.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
The organization is under U.S. sanctions, caught between a need to change and a refusal to do so.
Mohamad Fawaz
A coalition of states is seeking to avert a U.S. attack, and Israel is in the forefront of their mind.
Michael Young
Implementing Phase 2 of Trump’s plan for the territory only makes sense if all in Phase 1 is implemented.
Yezid Sayigh
Israeli-Lebanese talks have stalled, and the reason is that the United States and Israel want to impose normalization.
Michael Young
Baku may allow radical nationalists to publicly discuss “reunification” with Azeri Iranians, but the president and key officials prefer not to comment publicly on the protests in Iran.
Bashir Kitachaev