Author Archives: Daniel Larison

About Daniel Larison

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC, where he also keeps a solo blog. He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and is a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Dallas. Follow him on Twitter.

Duterte and U.S. Foreign Policy

The U.S. shouldn’t keep its forces where they aren’t wanted, and it shouldn’t want to keep security dependents that no longer desire our presence.

Abusing Proxies and the Incessant Need to Meddle in Foreign Conflicts

David Ignatius deplores the U.S. habit of “seduction and abandonment” when it …

The Lament of So-Called ‘Internationalists’

If more Republicans are souring on “internationalism” in foreign policy, that’s the least surprising development of all.

2016 and the Politics of the Nuclear Deal

The nuclear deal wasn’t going to be an issue that determined many votes.

McMullin’s Dreadfully Conventional Hawkishness

McMullin is an anti-Trump candidate whose main appeal is to Republicans that remain deeply committed to a very aggressive foreign policy.

The Fantasies of Iran Hawks

The idea that Obama has pursued “indefatigable sponsorship of Iran” is a lazy smear that is utterly divorced from reality.

Our Warped Understanding of ‘Leadership’ in Foreign Policy

Increased U.S. meddling in the Middle East is presented to the public as if it were a necessary and unavoidable course of action when it is neither.

The Week’s Most Interesting Reads

The election that killed foreign policy. Paul Pillar remarks on the damage …

The Dangers of ‘Centrist Internationalism’

The only thing that is international about this “centrist internationalism” seems to be that it seeks to inflict death and destruction on people in other countries.

Clinton’s Aggressive Foreign Policy

Clinton will be coming into office with a more aggressive foreign policy agenda that has never been seriously debated.

The Third Presidential Debate

Trump missed his last major chance to make the election more competitive.

The Third Presidential Debate’s Neglect of Foreign Policy

The U.S. is perpetually at war, and some of those wars aren’t even up for debate during the process of choosing the next president.

The Perpetually Overrated Rubio

For some reason, Rubio is judged by a very different standard

Foreign Policy and the Third Presidential Debate

The candidates have had to answer remarkably few questions about how and why they would continue America’s entanglements in foreign conflicts.

The Rubio Mirage Won’t Go Away

Rubio is a senator with no significant accomplishments to his name.

The World Doesn’t Need More U.S. Interventionism

The “successful” U.S. interventions in the past are severely outnumbered by the failures and disasters.

The Imaginary Iranian ‘Empire’

Referring to Iran as an “imperial” power is a ridiculous exaggeration.

The Week’s Most Interesting Reads

Saudi Arabia’s senseless pursuit of war in Yemen. The Financial Times calls …

Increasing Support for the War on Yemen Is Obviously Insane

Intensifying support for the war will produce more attacks on civilian targets and more misery for the people of Yemen.

Foolish Patronage, Bad Clients, and the War on Yemen

As long as Washington is eager to keep its clients satisfied, the U.S. will find itself supporting all manner of stupid and destructive policies.

← Older posts