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 was a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Dallas. Follow him on Twitter.
Houellebecq makes a mistake common to defenders of Trump’s foreign policy: he invests great importance in the fleeting, superficial rhetoric that the president sometimes uses while ignoring the president’s actions.
S.J.Res. 54 challenges decades of Congressional acquiescence to illegal presidential warmaking.
The passage of the resolution is an important victory in reclaiming Congressional war powers and it is the first vote of its kind under the War Powers Resolution to pass the Senate.
U.S. security interests aren’t threatened by Chinese and Russian influence in Africa, and framing U.S. policy for the entire continent as a zero-sum great power competition isn’t going to be very appealing to African governments.
The U.S.-Saudi relationship is not nearly as important or valuable to the U.S. as its apologists claim, and the Saudi government is little more than a liability.
It is a credit to the perseverance and determination of war opponents that the war is finally being debated and voted on.
This is simply a case of punishing the weakest and most vulnerable people in North Korea in a vain bid to revive a “maximum pressure” policy that has already failed.
Today both the House and the Senate have opportunities to do their constitutional duty and to begin extricating the U.S. from a truly shameful, unnecessary war.
The real question isn’t whether or not we should stop “trying to solve” problems in the region, because we haven’t been trying to do that, but whether we should stop using the countries of the region as pawns in our government’s destructive fixations with terrorism and Iran.
Almost 16 million people are food insecure even with humanitarian food aid.
The Arhab massacre is the U.S.-backed war on Yemen in miniature.
Persuading Trump to throw more money at the Pentagon must have been the easiest assignment in Mattis’ life.
Quitting the INF Treaty unfortunately fits the administration’s pattern of reneging on and abandoning agreements without giving any thought to the consequences of withdrawal.
This is what happens when someone with nothing but disdain for diplomacy is appointed as our government’s chief diplomat.
Support for the war on Yemen is the definition of a policy that the U.S. doesn’t need to have.
It isn’t surprising that someone as ignorant and hapless as Jared Kushner has been taken in by Mohammed bin Salman, but what is everyone else’s excuse?
The U.S. has not only been enabling Saudi coalition war crimes in an unauthorized war for more than three and a half years, but American taxpayers have also been paying far more for the war than we knew.
Meet the senators who took Saudi money. Ben Freeman reports on the …
There is no question that the Saudi coalition has been using starvation as a weapon in its war on Yemen, and that by itself should give us a good enough reason to cut off all support to their war effort.
To persist in this despicable policy when we can clearly see the destructive effects it is having on millions of innocent people would very simply be evil.← Older posts
from The American Conservative