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.
Trump and Israel. Kelley Vlahos reports on the uncertainty created by Trump’s …
A global mission to eradicate an ineradicable phenomenon has nothing to do with benefiting Americans.
It gains the U.S. nothing but problems, and whatever symbolic value it has for Israel will quickly be outweighed by the costs.
Bush and Ross would commit the U.S. to more aggressive policies in the region that serve no American interests.
Backing a Kurdish state would be one more unnecessary headache for the U.S. that serves no discernible American interest.
At best, Trump appointees’ preoccupation with Iran is a distraction from more pressing security threats.
Haley’s testimony showed both extreme hawkish “pro-Israel” bias and an almost total misunderstanding of who our real allies are.
Haley and Trump seem to be of one mind that one of the priorities of U.S. foreign policy should be covering for the illegal behavior of a client state.
Obama has probably done more to discredit “humanitarian” interventionism with his policies than any other recent president.
Professionals that want to serve in government should refrain from signing their names to denunciations of candidates unless they are prepared to be shut out from government positions as a result.
Obama’s legacy is continuing U.S. involvement in wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Yemen.
Poking China in the eye continues to be remarkably ill-advised.
Obama’s reckless interventionism. Bonnie Kristian reviews the record of Obama’s many wars. …
Cruz and Graham’s bill to defund the U.N. will reduce U.S. influence in the world in a vain bid to show “strength.”
Whatever Tillerson’s reason for making these comments might be, it risks worsening relations with China without gaining the U.S. anything.
If Tillerson thinks the U.S. should have armed Ukraine in 2014, that doesn’t reflect well on his judgment.
Tillerson’s prepared remarks include several worrisome statements.
Relocating the embassy would be a cause of much grief for both governments for years to come and would gain them nothing.
Future historians may be challenged to explain to their contemporaries why so many people were fixated on getting the U.S. mired in a foreign civil war.
One recurring theme in Obama’s foreign policy decisions is that he leaves a huge gap between his speeches and the policies he is actually prepared to carry out.← Older posts
from The American Conservative