George W. Bush’s policies toward terror detainees were perhaps some of his most jaw-dropping. Barack Obama came to office promising to change course. So far, he has done little. It remains to be seen whether the president can—or wants to—develop a
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.
Contrary to what many have said, supporting torture is not part of being a conservative. If continued, White House policies that tolerate it will undermine U.S. credibility, produce bad intelligence and put American soldiers at risk.
On Tuesday, the UN General Assembly voted to give Vietnam a seat on the Security Council. Washington would do well to use this opportunity to develop stronger relations with Hanoi.
The finger-pointing should extend far beyond those mentioned in the recently released inspector general's report on the CIA's pre-9/11 intelligence failures.
Stopping torture and changing the policies of the Bush administration may not be enough. With a whole new type of terrorist bred from extraordinary rendition and torture, the last eight years may well prove inescapable.
Geoffrey Roberts, the author of Stalin's Wars, responds to Andrew J. Bacevich's review of the book in the September/October issue of The National Interest.
