A presidential election and the demands of economic recovery could offer the United States a new chance to lead on climate.

How can the United States and the European Union best lead and steward global efforts to prevent natural disasters by protecting our fragile ocean, including its high seas that are owned by no one, but shared by everyone?

Presidents make lonely, difficult decisions about the use of force to protect U.S. interests—usually with the solace of knowing at least that diplomacy had failed. The tragedy of the current plight is that diplomacy was succeeding before it was abandoned.

By putting up roadblocks to the necessary transition to a low-carbon global economy, Trump is making American businesses less competitive and leaving new jobs and economic opportunities up for grabs to other countries.

With the withdrawal of U.S. troops from northern Syria, Trump has made it infinitely harder, if not impossible, for the United States to do what he claims he wants: ask allies to share in the burden of national security.

Since the Paris agreement was adopted, climate analysts have argued that the initial commitments made by more than 185 countries were insufficient to reach the agreement’s goals in fighting climate change.

Scientists tell us we must act now to avoid the ravages of climate change. If we fail, future generations will judge us all as failures, not just this president.

You have to go to the source of the problem to solve a challenge as vast as the health of the world’s oceans. But government can’t do it alone.

Destructive and illegal fishing practices are resulting in more and bigger boats fishing for fewer and smaller fish.

The global economy is accelerating at a digital pace, but our systems and politics are stuck in the industrial age. People sometimes choose the wrong path when they’ve lost confidence in the old answers.