Ever since President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in 2017, Washington has been engulfed in a contentious debate whether leaving the treaty was a geo-economic blunder or a necessary step to protect the American economy.

While the Trump administration has distanced itself from multilateralism with an “America First” approach, the Chinese communist regime has sought to promote and exploit multilateralism in pursuit of a “China First” policy, one that is at variance not only with America’s national interests, but with those of the rest of the world’s sovereign states as well.

While it is still too early to ascertain the COVID-19 pandemic’s damage to our country and the world, it is already evident that the crisis will result in structural changes within and among countries.

Christian and Muslim politicians and leaders reaching out to each other is one of the more hopeful signs in our increasingly divided world.

An outright transatlantic breakup isn’t imminent today, but some European countries may eventually try to balance the US and China geopolitically.

The real 2020 questions about the US-China contest lie in how they influence the context for global trade, technology standards, military tools, and power projection.

The German question has returned, along with the greatest foreign policy issue facing Americans regarding the European balance of power.

If Boris Johnson responds successfully not only to English populism and Brexit but also Scottish nationalism, he would arguably become one of the great prime ministers of British history. Is he the right figure for the task?

In The Political Theology of European Integration, Mark Royce corrects the political science discourse by explaining how political theology can affect international relations.