Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
A conciliatory approach with Russia has not worked out for the past three U.S. presidents or a long list of European leaders, and it likely won’t for Trump either.
Relations between the United States and Russia are at their lowest since the end of the Cold War. President Trump just demonstrated at the recent NATO summit, he is more focused on the “me”, and this meeting in Helsinki might more narrowly benefit him and align his preferences.
As Trump prepares to meet Vladimir Putin, there is no sign that he has absorbed the lessons of multiple rounds of Western sanctions against Russia since 2014.
By excluding the Muslims from the defense of the nation, the state has undermined the project of a multicultural India enshrined in the Constitution and prepared the ground for the saffronisation of the public sphere.
The task of the Helsinki summit is to manage the relationship between the United States and Russia. Yet there is the chance of falling into different illusions of what that looks like.
The chances of Britain staying in the European Union have risen sharply following two resignations from the cabinet of UK Prime Minister Theresa May.
The Trump administration has almost no chance of getting North Korea’s complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization. But peace and security on the Korean peninsula is possible if Trump is willing to adjust to the reality that America will have to live with a nuclear North Korea.
Russia’s relations with Europe and the United States are at their worst since the end of the Soviet Union. Yet the biggest challenge facing the West may come from within, not outside, the Western alliance.
Mexican President-elect Andres López Obrador’s landslide victory was a huge success for his coalition, gaining control of most of the state legislatures. It has been decades since any Mexican government has had this level of political control.
Some White House advisors see trade deficits as a threat to growth and security. But no one wins in a trade war, certainly not U.S. and Chinese consumers who will have to pay higher prices.
U.S. President Donald Trump may undo any progress NATO leaders achieve at the 2018 NATO summit when he meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.
Both Hamas and Hezbollah have taken a flexible approach to maintaining their political influence. This has allowed them to weather the ups and downs of their relationship in recent years.
New Delhi and Seoul should focus on building flexible middle power coalitions in Asia to limit the impact of the current volatility in the relations between the United States and China.
Despite his own destructive tendencies, the U.S. President may well prove to be the catalyst NATO and the EU need. The two organizations are starting to confront the reality of a post-Atlantic era.
With a growing presence and interest in the Indo-Pacific, France and the UK could be valuable U.S. partners in maintaining the regional rules-based order.
There are many lessons to be drawn from the darker days of India’s political history. The one that ought to be demystified is the view that the suspension or promotion of democracy necessarily stuns or shocks international leaders to the extent that those in India might expect them to.
For the visit to be a success, Pompeo should leave Pyongyang with specific details on the North Korean nuclear inventory, concrete next steps and a timeline which shows Kim is earnest in denuclearizing, and an agreement on how verification of any of the aforementioned objectives will happen.
Chinese capital originally destined for the United States switches to the European continent, making transatlantic collaboration more essential.
The promise and peril of the Helsinki summit comes from the fact that the U.S. president is ready to discard the conventional wisdom—not just on Russia, but on America’s role in Eurasia and its relations with its allies.
Five years after Egypt’s first democratically elected president was ousted, the economic reforms implemented by President Sisi have left their economy stagnant with few opportunities for growth for the Egyptian people and the private sector.