Last week the U.S. lifted its arms embargo on Egypt that was imposed after the military coup. After changing its tone regarding Assad in Syria, the U.S. is again sacrificing possible peace in the region in exchange for short term gains and interests
More
Although the nuclear talks conducted between the P5+1 and Iran were endorsed by the Obama administration from the very beginning, parts of U.S. Congress under the influence of Israel, do not hide their objections against the agreement.
More
U.S. foreign policy failed to come up with a policy that would pressure Iran to play a more responsible role in Yemen. As a result of this inaction, other countries in the surrounding region became involved in the situation militarily.
If Japanese foreign policymakers want to have an autonomous foreign policy, they need to find innovative ways to lower the impact of these limitations and respond to the potential skepticism that may arise in public opinion in regards to the goals and missions of this foreign policy.
In fact, the timing of the operation may be interpreted as a sign of Turkeys diligence to more actively fight against ISIS.
To reach an agreement with Iran has been one of the main foreign policy goals of the Obama administration and its attainment will mark a major instance in the foreign policy of the U.S.
The Syrian crisis has created a new cold war environment that calls on countries to take sides. This new environment has given rise to a state of "inaction" which has worked well for the Assad regime.
More
Just like President Obama, the American public also stands against another war in the Middle East.
More
Syriza is a loose coalition of numerous radical leftist movements whereas the AK Party has been a strong and unified political movement constructed around Erdoğan's leadership.
Many people are expecting an explanation from Secretary Kerry in regards to his statements about Syria.
Entering the last two years of the Obama administration, it is not very difficult to say that foreign policy has not been its strongest point.
While trying to understand the causes and outcomes of the war in Iraq, the U.S. administration will need to deal with these multiple challenges and evolving situation on the ground at the same time.
Addressing the problem on both sides of the border would necessitate a more comprehensive strategy. The new strategy should involve actions more than PR campaigns and newspaper headlines.
The rationale behind Turkey's policies reflecting its cultural capital, in turn, relates to the country's redefinition of its national interests, which manifest themselves in the form of Turkey's strong reactions against the military junta in Egypt and Israeli oppression in Gaza.
The broken trust and lack of credibility may necessitate a lot more effort, resource and time allocated to repair those relationships. While the U.S. was imagining a world without her, it could face a U.S. without the world.
Now with the World Cup frenzy in the world, and for the first time at this level in the U.S., Americans are one more time discovering the near-universality of soccer and also the feeling of fully participating in "a World Cup" along the other nations.
ISIL, which emerged in Iraq, did not need the Turkish border to get into Syria. Anyone who can read a map can see there is a 600 km border between Iraq and Syria. Furthermore, the political conditions that made ISIL possible have nothing to do with Turkey.
Obama and his team understood that public opinion has been heavily affected by "war fatigue" after two lengthy wars in the Middle East and avoiding any more conflict in the region has become priority.
Surely, questions about the war in Iraq will never end. We will see more accusations and reporting on this war in the coming years and decades.
Multilateralism, in the absence of a clearly articulated policy goal and willingness for international leadership, will not achieve results by itself.
President Obama's policies on these matters will have serious impacts on U.S. popularity in the world.