As the Obama White House sees it, much of the D.C. foreign policy “establishment” is “doing the bidding of their Arab and pro-Israel funders.” Translation: foreign policy experts who disagree with the president do not have the best interests of the United States in mind. This week some members of the so-called foreign policy establishment fired back.

If one actually looks at the risks of nuclear war as well as the likelihood of proliferation at the start of the President’s term compared to now, the Obama’s nonproliferation record earns a failing grade. This becomes clear when one reflects on the Russian nuclear posture, the much ballyhooed Iran deal, and the situation in nuclear North Korea.

Obama and Bush demonstrate the dangers of overly aggressive and overly passive foreign policies, but they share something in common: a deeply moral vision of America’s role in the world.

President Obama danced the Tango literally and figuratively while in Argentina.  The figurative dance was his “apology” as some described…

Despite a posture of inquiry, Jeffrey Goldberg’s journalistic empathy dissolves into rank advocacy: journalism as echo chamber. Here is what access to ultimate political power can breed: something that rings false from beginning to end, something much closer to propaganda than truth-seeking.

Sub-Saharan Africa in the 21st century faces one great opportunity and two great dangers. And American foreign policy will profoundly affect each.

In every year of Mr. Obama’s presidency, without exception, the cause of freedom has been in retreat around the world.

If Gitmo is “contrary to who we are,” to borrow Obama’s language, if EITs “caused immeasurable damage to the United States’ public standing,” to quote the Senate report, then what exactly is a drone war that metes out punishment based on guilt by association and amounts to execution without trial?

Ian Bremmer’s Superpower provides a different perspective to Obama’s description of his incoherent foreign policy in his final State of the Union Address.