NATO
- All
- Counterterrorism
- Economics
- Environment
- Security
- Law & Institutions
- Politics & Society
- U.S. Policy
- Defense Policy
- Domestic Politics
- Foreign Policy
- Obama Administration
- GW Bush Administration
- Clinton Administration
- GHW Bush Administration
- Reagan Administration
- Carter Administration
- Ford Administration
- Nixon Administration
- Johnson Administration
- Kennedy Administration
- Eisenhower Administration
- Truman Administration
- FD Roosevelt Administration
- Pre-1932 Administration
- Grand Strategy
- Legal Issues
- Foreign Aid
- Public Diplomacy
- Govt. Institutions
- Homeland Security
- Intelligence
- Counterterrorism
- Economics
- Environment
- Security
- Law & Institutions
- Politics & Society
- U.S. Policy
- previous-disabled
- Page 1of 16
- next
Poland's minister of foreign affairs speaks with Foreign Affairs about his country's history, its future, and its place in Europe.
A host of issues confront NATO leaders this weekend in Chicago. Success depends on prioritizing Afghanistan, the Smart Defense Program, and enlargement. Russia can wait.
NATO’s operation in Libya has rightly been praised for saving lives and ending a tyrannical regime, write the U.S. permanent representative to NATO and its supreme allied commander for Europe. But to replicate the success, member states must reinforce their political cohesion and improve the burden sharing that made the mission work.
More and more outsiders are calling for a humanitarian intervention in Syria to stop Bashar al-Assad's killing sprees. But for this to work, Syria's various opposition groups will have to first coalesce into a single, unified political and military force.
Despite the fall of the Qaddafi regime in Libya, humanitarian intervention still has plenty of critics. But their targets are usually the early, ugly missions of the 1990s. Since then -- as Libya has shown -- the international community has learned its lessons and grown much more adept at using military force to save lives.
The United States can no longer afford a world-spanning foreign policy. Retrenchment -- cutting military spending, redefining foreign priorities, and shifting more of the defense burden to allies -- is the only sensible course. Luckily, that does not have to spell instability abroad. History shows that pausing to recharge national batteries can renew a dominant power’s international legitimacy.
NATO's success in Libya shows how important and effective the alliance remains, writes its secretary-general. But with Europe rocked by the economic crisis and slashing military budgets, future missions will be imperiled unless NATO members get smarter about what and how they spend.
Too often over the last decades, policymakers in Washington have viewed Moscow's resistance to U.S. policies through the lens of psychology. In fact, Russia's foreign policy has been driven by its own rational self-interest.
The United States may have reset its Russia policy, but the U.S. approach to the other states in the region is in dire need of a conceptual revolution.
NATO has traditionally treated Russia as a strategic pariah. But now, the West urgently needs Moscow's cooperation on a host of issues. A vision for turning Russia into a productive member of the Euro-Atlantic community is within reach: Russia should join NATO. Although NATO would run a strategic risk by admitting Russia, the Atlantic alliance is actually running a greater strategic risk by excluding it.
- previous-disabled
- Page 1of 16
- next
