To deal with Iran and the Middle East, Britain needs EU support as much as the EU needs a serious defense and security policy. Neither will materialize when the summer pause ends.*
The EU’s twin policy of peacemaking and state building in the Middle East is unachievable. Now, the union must choose between preventing the status quo from deteriorating and embracing a one-state reality.
The dangerous standoff between Iran and the United States has exposed Europe’s political and strategic weakness and its inability to exert any influence in the region.
The Turkish leadership has not only turned its back on its proclaimed European ambitions. It has also launched itself into a different political, legal, and ethical orbit.
European leaders must acknowledge that the peace project on which the EU built its reputation is today inadequate for defending its values and interests or acting strategically.
As China asserts its growing military, political, and economic power, European countries should follow Paris’s lead by deepening ties with India and other democracies.
The Brexit saga is exposing the inadequacy of the EU’s foreign and security policy. If only Germany would provide the leadership the union now needs.
Formal reunification talks in Cyprus are suspended. It is time to give a boost to some stalled confidence-building measures and enable Turkish Cypriot voters to vote freely in the European elections.
The alliance’s reflex is to shy away from political discussions. This doesn’t bode well when it comes to even thinking about developing a shared strategic outlook toward China.
New actors are contesting the basic norms of statehood, borders, and non-intervention at the local, state, regional, and global levels. But is Europe prepared?
Berlin’s consistent calls to protect multilateralism in the wake of President Donald Trump’s verbal attacks on the post-1945 institutions often ring hollow.
This year’s Munich Security Conference ended as it begun: a bickering West reluctant to address the new geostrategic realities.
Diplomats, parliamentarians, and experts at the 2019 Munich Security Conference weigh in on the future of global leadership.
In a time of transatlantic uncertainty, any further divergence between Europe and the United States becomes a net win for Russia.
The German chancellor discarded caution, discarded her notes, and discarded diplomatic niceties.
The differences between NATO allies seem to be about intentions, outcomes, and the meaning of values.
This year’s Munich Security Conference will expose the increasing drift of the EU, perhaps even more than the transatlantic rift.
U.S. policy toward Central Europe is driven by a blend of mercantilism and great power competition, with a dash of U.S. domestic politics. It also opens opportunities for cooperation with the EU.
It’s not too late for Poland to let go of the mirage of “Fort Trump” and pursue a more realistic security policy in collaboration with its European and NATO allies.
Washington’s decision to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty represents the end of the post-Cold war era and America’s new strategic priorities.