Q&A
Aaron David Miller, David Rennie
{
"authors": [
"Aaron David Miller"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"Palestine",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo Shift on Israeli Settlements Is U.S. Foreign Policy at its Worst
The shift on the U.S. position towards Israeli settlements combined all of the worst elements of foreign policy under President Trump—an obsession with his predecessor; the centrality of domestic politics in his foreign policy; and the untethering of the recent announcement from any coherent strategy.
Published on Nov 21, 2019
Source: USAToday
Monday’s surprise announcement by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the United States views Israeli settlements as not “inconsistent with international law” should have come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the Trump administration’s pro-Netanyahu and anti-Palestinian policies since coming into office.
The move combined all of the worst elements of Trumpian foreign policy — an obsession with his predecessor; the centrality of domestic politics in his foreign policy; and the untethering of the recent announcement from any coherent strategy, including the furtherance of the administration’s own peace plan.
Indeed, Monday’s upending of decades of U.S. policy was yet another example of the Trump administration coming up with a solution to a problem America didn’t have and creating new problems in the process...
About the Author
Aaron David Miller
Senior Fellow, American Statecraft Program
Aaron David Miller is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, focusing on U.S. foreign policy.
- “China Doesn’t Do Anything for Free”
- Trump’s National Security Decisionmaking Is BrokenCommentary
Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller
Recent Work
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.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- A Geographic and Social Reconfiguration in LebanonCommentary
Israel is encroaching on the country’s territory, while the Lebanese look askance at one another.
Issam Kayssi
- Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is InsaneCommentary
The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.
Michael Young
- Continental Asia and the Rise of Portfolio PoliticsArticle
“Central Asia” as an analytical category is itself part of the problem. The term is a Soviet administrative inheritance, drawn along lines that served the convenience of Moscow. The Central Asian states the Soviets named no longer see themselves through this category alone and are not aligning across political blocs but are instead building external partnerships sector by sector, assigning different partners to different functions.
Jennifer B. Murtazashvili
- Palestine’s Climate Change Planning Faces Its LimitsArticle
Barriers ranging from weak legal frameworks to ongoing, occupation-related limitations are constraining Palestine from achieving its ambitious climate targets.
Joy Arkeh, Nabil Nasser
- California’s Global Trade Cities: Driving Local and National OutcomesPaper
Cities across the United States facilitate investment in American communities. Yet, because global attention remains focused on U.S. trade policy, their distinctive and bold local approaches to international trade and investment promotion are often underappreciated.
Wyatt Frank, Marissa Jordan
