U.S President Donald Trump may have Israel and Saudi Arabia on his side. But without a hint of any strategic contingency planning by the White House, it would appear that the United States can expect to pay for the Iran decision in spades—from western Europe to the Pacific.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s faulty assumptions and unrealistic expectations could doom prospects for peacefully deescalating one nuclear standoff—and applying these misguided lessons to Iran could manufacture yet another.
Despite the positive nature of the joint statement by the Korean leaders pledging to make progress on long-standing problems, the reality is that there is much hard work to do if the U.S.-North Korean summit is to be a success and lead to real progress.
The positive short-term outlook for a summit between Kim Jong Un, and President Donald Trump should not obscure the serious long-terms risks created by the latest spate of high-stakes diplomacy.
Democratic foreign-policy veterans want answers from Trump’s pick for Secretary of State.
As North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and ballistic missile capabilities mature, Washington should pursue a comprehensive and verified capping of Pyongyang’s nuclear program, pending total denuclearization at a later date.
John Bolton wants regime change in North Korea and Iran, and he’ll do whatever it takes to get it.
Seoul wants to try diplomacy with Pyongyang. Where does that leave Washington?
Rather than use Cold War principles, nuclear states should shift their nuclear doctrines and capabilities to strategic deterrence as needed by the twenty-first century.
Widening the role of nuclear weapons and appearing to blur the distinction between nuclear war and fundamentally less catastrophic threats is neither necessary nor helpful to making America great again.