North Korea

While many are hopeful about the current back and forth between Trump and Kim, the history of US-North Korea relations gives little cause for hope.

Just war theorists should agree that war must be waged according to the rule of law if it is to be considered an exercise of “legitimate authority.” The American system, with its marbling of war powers between the executive and legislative branches, usually requires authorization based on the deliberative consent of the popular will expressed through the people’s representatives in Congress.

Promising that America will never apologize for advancing its national interest, Trump used national security arguments more for his domestic goals than international agenda.

When it comes to democracy promotion, it seems the Obama-Trump era is the aberration.

A socially responsible Christian ethic understands that the ordinance of the nation-state—even in a fallen world—calls for prophetic scrutiny in hopes that it would be brought back in alignment with civic and moral righteousness.

A disruptive foreign policy, such as the Trump Administration’s, is not necessarily disordering, and may even be warranted, especially when the status quo is unstable or unjust.  But to be justified morally, it must be creatively destructive, replacing the old order with a new one.

We were mostly right about his hateful rhetoric, fundamental dishonesty, trade wars, admiration for foreign dictators, and wild inconsistency. But we overestimated Trump’s competence and work ethic. His ability to bring material harm to the United States has been limited by how little he works and how little he knows about the presidency.

The Trump foreign policy is like the administration’s domestic policy: a little irreverent, ambitious, and completely impervious to experts’ warnings.

The United Nations has failed to do what it was created to do—“promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security.”