Follow us on social

google cta
51051345377_af2d7d40bb_o-scaled

Allies' talks on North Korea a positive first step

US, Japanese, and South Korean officials met today to coordinate their approach: they should start by focusing on a peace regime.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

The news of a meeting today between U.S., Japanese, and South Korean officials to coordinate on North Korea policy is welcome. Washington will hopefully be in listening mode and ready to adjust its North Korean policy review to reflect its allies' views and concerns. 

While denuclearization remains one ultimate goal, the more near-term goal — and better starting point for negotiations — must be the building of a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula that incorporates both conventional and nuclear arms reductions and credible, sustained confidence-building measures.  

The notion that the United States has ‘been there’ and ‘done that’ with such a two-track approach is simply untrue. And, in any event, the environment is now very different. Pyongyang is reeling from COVID and likely to double-down on provocations if Tokyo, Seoul, and Washington opt primarily for sticks over carrots in dealing with it. 

The notion, advocated by some, that Washington can work with Seoul and Tokyo to somehow use North Korea policy to maneuver against Beijing or to compel China to apply an unprecedented level of pressure on Pyongyang is fantasy. The allies (and especially Seoul, which wants to maintain good relations with China) won’t cooperate and Beijing will not be persuaded to facilitate the collapse of its troublesome North Korean “ally."


Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin participate in a Special Measures Agreement Initialing Ceremony with Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Chung Eui-yong and Republic of Korea Defense Minister Suh Wook, in Seoul, Republic of Korea, on March 18, 2021. [State Department photo by Ron Przysucha]
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump holds a joint news conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Feb. 4, 2025. (Shutterstock/ Joshua Sukoff)

Did the US only attack Iran because of Israel?

QiOSK

In the months that led up to the Iraq War, the Bush administration went to extraordinary lengths to convince the world of the need to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Leading officials laid out their case in public, sharing what they claimed was evidence that Iraq was moving rapidly toward the deployment of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. When U.S. tanks rolled across the border, everyone knew the justification: the U.S. was determined to thwart Iraq’s development of weapons of mass destruction, however fictitious that threat would later prove to be.

In the months that led up to the Iran War, the Trump administration took a different tack. President Trump spoke only occasionally of Iran, offering a smattering of justifications for growing U.S. tensions with the country. He claimed without evidence that Iran was rebuilding its nuclear program after the U.S.-Israeli attack last June and even developing missiles that could strike the United States. But he insisted that Tehran could make a deal with seven magic words: “we will never have a nuclear weapon.”

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS
Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Craven Europeans give US and Israel a blank check for illegal war

Middle East

In the aftermath of the new U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the transatlantic alliance has offered a response that confirmed what many both in the West and outside knew all along: that for London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, the "rules-based international order" has been reduced to a simple, brutal premise: might makes right, provided the might is Western.

The joint statement from the E3 — France, Germany, and the United Kingdom — is a master class in evasion. "We did not participate in these strikes, but are in close contact with our international partners, including the United States and Israel," they declared. The text also lists all the references and rationalizations used by Iran hawks — “nuclear program, ballistic missile program, regional destabilization and repression against its own people.”

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Hundreds of people attend a pro-democracy demonstration against U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C., U.S., on February 28, 2026. Demonstrators cited a number of reasons for their opposition to Trump, including his involvement with sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, ICE raids, authoritarian policies, and today’s bombing of Iran. (Photo by Allison Bailey/NurPhoto) via REUTERS CONNECT

How does this war with Iran end? Or does it?

QiOSK

Now that President Trump has launched an illegal, unprovoked war of choice on Iran, the next question inevitably becomes: how does this end? Or, what are some off ramps Trump can take to end it before the situation turns out of control?

There are three broad scenarios; the first and most likely is that Trump continues this until he gets some sort of regime implosion and then declares victory, while also washing his hands of whatever follows.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.