My first reaction when French President Emmanuel Macron said this week that the European Union needed its own army to defend against potential adversaries — including the United States — was to suggest he go to Normandy and ask the 9,000 dead Americans there who saved France, for the second time, what they thought about the idea. But, I'm sure he won't do that.
As we have seen in the United States in vibrant real time over the last several years, the media have become a battleground for the powerful to fight it out with the goal of altering public opinion and, therefore, influencing policy -- in other words, to gain power.
U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton is visiting Moscow this week to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian National Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev. It is reported that a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin could also be in the works.
In the wake of the long ordeal of Malaysian politician Anwar Ibrahim, whose career was derailed for years by legal battles and convictions for sodomy, a campaign against LGBT people in Malaysia has been ramping up since Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir came to power this year.
I remember the 2008 financial crisis very well. Actually, I remember it starting in 2006. At the time, I was working at a very large Wall Street investment bank.
As the trade wars with Beijing slog on, we're learning that China may have infected thousands of American computers in business and in government with tiny microchips in a massive exercise in espionage.
As I write this, hundreds of people are converging on the streets of Washington, D.C., and in the halls of the U.S. Capitol with T-shirts saying "Believe Women." Does anyone bother to ask what this really means?
For the Trump administration, it's not about Syria in the Middle East, or even Russia; it's about Iran, and only Iran.
The global financial world is changing, as President Trump would say, big league. This week marks the next-level escalation of the trade war between the United States and China, as POTUS attempts to roll back decades of the hollowing out of American manufacturing in favor of emerging markets in the Pacific.
The Iranian regime is starting to crack.
A recent tour of the Balkans proved a potent reminder once again of the importance of this region to U.S. and Western policymakers. The Balkans are steeped in history and very much in the middle of today's geopolitical great game. We ignore the area at our peril.
Justice reform sounded like a good idea in Albania, which like many former communist countries, is dealing with the hangover from a decades-long legacy of corruption.
Russia is an adversary, but they are not threatening the very existence of the United States. China is. Iran is. North Korea was.
If I wanted to destroy an enemy society, and had a long-term focus, wanted to do it stealthily, and effectively, to make the society destroy itself and the ability to defend itself, I would do the following:
Turkey is not an ally. Turkey has not been an ally of the West for a long time. Turkey is a corrupt, Islamist regime that cannot be trusted to defend the alliance, at least not until there is a leadership and political change in-country.
As Congress and the Trump administration announce sanctions and tariffs on just about every country in the world, it should be noted that this will be the last time the U.S. can use its hegemony over global financial markets to achieve foreign policy goals.
There have been many theories behind the president's decision to reverse sanctions against Chinese telecom giant ZTE, and allow it to survive and deal with American companies.
The Western media have made a big deal about the threat from Vladimir Putin's Russia. But as I've written before, even though it could, it's not Moscow that is threatening to destroy the United States and Israel. It's Iran.
Special counsel Robert Mueller is going after a group in Washington. They have one single crime. They are Trump Republicans.
I've written many times before about how you have to look at the consequences of a politician's actions and policies to judge his priorities, not his oratory.
