From the January/February issue of The National Interest: Bloggers are moving into the Washington establishment’s neighborhood. From K Street to Capitol Hill, will they ever feel at home?
When a U.S. administration announces unrealistic foreign-policy goals, it sets itself up for failure. Today, we confront a very different international landscape, and the heady days of 2003 permanently belong to the past.
Responding to Dimitri K. Simes’s assertion that we aren’t having a real debate over foreign policy, Derek Chollet argues the Democrats are providing genuine alternatives; Grover G. Norquist looks at the structural reasons inhibiting both parties f
The sharp divides within the conservative movement are more imagined than real. Any conservative—whether "paleo" or "neo"— would object to a foreign policy bereft of values.
Opportunistic policies advocated on both sides of the political aisle won’t address the real challenges that threaten the well-being of the United States.
The United States can’t bring the democratic nations of the world together—why should we expect it to lead the way for everyone else?
Military misadventures in Iraq should not discredit democracy promotion.
The Bush Administration’s focus on democracy overlooks the need for security.
The debacle in Iraq reaffirms the lesson of a thousand years ago: there is no such thing as a good crusade; divine missions are not conducive to sensible policy.