Republicans once stood for peace through strength, not endless war.
Supporting Saudi strikes against al-Qaeda’s enemies cannot be in the United States’s interest.
His father’s Cold War rhetoric shows how to present peace to Republicans.
Restrictionist rhetoric that would be unthinkable in the U.S. has moved into mainstream European publications.
The pontiff recognizes the Armenian genocide of a century ago, but can he do more about today’s wars and injustices?
The former Florida governor hasn’t yet signed on to regime change in Iran, which suggests his foreign policy just might be more like Ronald Reagan’s than Tom Cotton’s.
Why is the United States obligated to support the wars and wishes of its brutal, terror-funding client state?
MORE IN World
Russian hardliners are seizing on American actions to push for catastrophe.
Here comes another savage war of peace.
The president practices the long American diplomatic tradition of ruthless pragmatism in the face of changing circumstances.
Let’s stop calling political foes and foreign threats the f-word.
Refusing to resolve one issue because it doesn’t magically solve all other problems is a mindless approach to foreign policy.
Is it still possible that history is going toward a definite destination?
If the Iran nuclear agreement is as advertised, Republican cries for war would be a 2016 disaster.
It’s not possible to start a war as a last resort.
Having achieved a breakthrough in the diplomatic process, the Obama administration now has to convince Congress that Iran will comply.
Opposing the deal isn’t smart positioning for the eventual Republican nominee.