Follow us on social

2021-11-29t125728z_1872391217_rc2deo98rmhp_rtrmadp_3_global-poy-2021-scaled

Responsible Statecraft 2021: Top 5 most-read articles of the year

This was a see-saw year with major headlines emphasizing the volatility of US relationships with the world. Our most popular stories reflect that.

Analysis | Washington Politics

The year 2021 was a see-saw in the classic sense: the Biden Administration accomplished the incredible feat of withdrawing the U.S. military from Afghanistan after 20 years of war.

Yet on many other fronts, stasis: the new president has failed to return the United States to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal; tensions with Russia and China remain the same or are in many cases worse, and the crippling war in Yemen continues. Promises by the administration to stop assistance to the Saudi coalition in order to help bring about an end to that war, have gone unfulfilled.

In many ways the most-read articles on Responsible Statecraft tin 2021 mirror those major foreign policy issues and audience interest in them, with the added bonus that they provide analysis not usually found in mainstream, establishment outlets. Below are the Top 5.

Other popular pieces not on that list nonetheless reflect the concerns and outrages of the day, as well as some of the best reporting RS had on offer. This included Eli Clifton (#6) uncovering the defense industry ties held by a majority of task force members advising the president to stay in Afghanistan, and Nick Turse (#13), who found a surprising number of U.S. commandos stationed in Europe today. Annelle Sheline (#14) explored some interesting connections between American Exceptionalism in Iraq and this year's Hollywood blockbuster, "Dune," and Rachel Odell slammed Washington rhetoric painting China as a threat to the "world order" (#17). On the 20-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, John Mueller started a big debate suggesting the U.S. should have never invaded Afghanistan in the first place (#20).

Check out our five most read articles of 2021:

#1 Trita Parsi : Revealed: How Biden rejected a reasonable way forward in Iran Deal talks (Aug. 20)

The White House reportedly wouldn’t commit to staying in the deal for the remainder of the president’s term.

#2 Jim Lobe : Three major networks devoted a full five minutes to Afghanistan in 2020 (Oct. 20)

It should be no surprise then that Americans were shocked at the speed at which the U.S.-backed Afghan army and government collapsed and the Taliban returned to power in Kabul in a rout.

#3 Anatol Lieven: What war with Russia over Ukraine would really look like (Nov. 24)

In recent statements, Moscow seems much more realistic about the consequences of actual conflict with Kiev and Western powers.

#4 Anatol Lieven: The generals lied and the fantasy died(Aug. 16)

H.R. McMaster and other apologists for the failed policy in Afghanistan would like us to focus on anything but their complicity in it today.

#5 Alex de Waal: Ethiopia: Salvaging a failing state(Nov. 10)

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has lost the war; the time has come for a ceasefire to negotiate the country’s future. (A more recent update by de Waal explores how Abiy was able to turn the tide in a matter of weeks.)


An Afghan man rests in his shop as he sell U.S. second hand materials outside Bagram U.S. air base, after American troops vacated it, in Parwan province, Afghanistan July 5, 2021. REUTERS/Mohammad Ismail/File Photo
Analysis | Washington Politics
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

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.