Some analysts believe Syria would be willing to distance itself from Iran in favor of a peace treaty with Israel. Syria and Iran have a history of close cooperation and their strategic relationship cannot be easily compromised.

There is an assumption that Syria would distance itself from Iran in favor of a peace treaty with Israel and normalized relations with the United States. Syria’s strategic relationship with Iran began in 1979 and both countries sought friendship as a deterrent from a mutual Iraqi threat. Iraq rivaled Syria as the true inheritor of Ba’thism and Arabism. Ethnic, religious and territorial disputes between Iran and Iraq prompted the former to seek an alliance with Syria.

Analysts are concerned that recent Islamist trends in Ankara could threaten the long-standing amicable relations between Israel and Turkey. These fears were highlighted by legislation passed in Turkey on Feb. 9, which rescinded a law in the constitution banning the wearing of a traditional Islamic headscarf. However, in June Turkey's high court overturned this ruling, claiming it violated separation of religion and state. Turkey is governed by the Justice and Development Party (AKP), whereby Recep Tayyip Erdogan is the prime minister and Abdullah Gul is the president. Erdogan and Gul share pro-Islamist beliefs that clash with the secular nature of the majority of Turkey's political and military establishment.

Among the many conflicts in the Middle East — Syria's attempted destabilization of Lebanon, Iranian ambitions to build a nuclear program, and the war in Iraq — the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains the most emotionally charged issue. To this day, Muslims and Arabs continue to perceive Israel's very existence as illegitimate: an entity serving the interests of the imperialist and colonialist West. Since 1947, many nations have been born, and some members of the international community continue to hold Israel to a higher moral standard than any other country. Israel is expected to negotiate with the Palestinians to end the conflict and help establish a viable Palestinian state.

Israelis and Syrians are holding talks regarding a potential peace treaty. Is this a realistic objective for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or does he profit more by keeping the conflict alive? Syria is a police state ruled by a strongman who controls all aspects of society. Assad restricts freedom at home and supports terrorism abroad in the name of defending Syria against Zionism and imperialism, which he claims have been imposed on his country by the West in order to destroy Islam and humiliate the Arabs. Assad's regime survives by indoctrinating its citizens to hate a common enemy, Israel.

The looming debate in Congress over building U.S. missiles defense sites in eastern Europe could be significantly altered in the wake of Russia’s war with neighboring Georgia.

The Bush administration is moving quickly to cement agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic in a rush to break ground on interceptor and radar sites in those two countries before leaving office. Democrats in Congress have stymied these efforts by using their legislative powers to postpone groundbreaking on the sites.

WILTON PARK, UK—On our day-trip into London, we made a stop at the American embassy. A fairly heated discussion about Guantanamo Bay and torture completely dominated the hour we spent there. Guantanamo was raised simply as an example of an issue that must very carefully defended overseas; I believe our speaker merely referenced it in passing. The minute the issue was raised, my European and American colleagues took the opportunity to delve in more deeply. We hardly discussed anything else from that point.

Much of the critique I had already heard back in the States, even by some of our own policy makers and elected officials: violating the Geneva conventions, hypocritical, immoral, secretive, detrimental to the West’s efforts in the Middle East, and a bit disgraceful overall. One of the American students said “embarrassing.”

WILTON PARK, UK—My introduction to London was four hours spent in the Gatwick airport, with a splitting headache, no Starbucks in sight (I was in the wrong terminal for that), and in a pair of shoes that I’ll never wear to travel again. It was 3 AM on my body’s clock, so I sipped on a sub-par latte, wishing desperately I had a British accent and all the sophistication it implies, and prepared myself for the week ahead by browsing the latest Economist. I had intended to read it on the plane, as well as a whole stack of intellectual material, but the screaming infant in front of me had other plans for our seven hours together.

“It looks like Mickey Mouse, it sounds like Mickey Mouse, but do you think Mickey Mouse would ever tell kids to fight Americans and the Jews?” asks FOX News anchor Eric Shawn.   The Mickey Mouse in question is nothing like his Walt Disney counterpart.  His name is Farfur and he teaches Palestinian children to fight for Israel’s destruction and Islam’s domination over the entire world.

“Tomorrow’s Pioneers,” a children’s program aired last summer by Hamas’ official television station, featured this unlicensed Mickey Mouse and a young co-host named Saraa.  Together, the two indoctrinate young views with teachings of Islamic supremacy, hatred of Israel and the U.S., and support of “resistance”—a euphemism for terrorism.

Some neoconservatives in Washington are obsessed with attacking Iran before President Bush leaves office at the end of this year. Hence, they have been pushing the Bush administration for increased economic and political isolation of Iran in order to weaken its current regime. Crucial to this plan is the support of Turkey, a traditional U.S. ally and an increasingly critical player in the region. But to the enormous frustration of the neoconservatives, such an attack does not align with Turkey's interests given its newly enhanced regional ties, maturing democracy, and new foreign policy. Instead, Turkey plays the negotiator role and favors diplomacy and direct talks to resolve the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program. With neoconservatives pressing for an attack on Iran and Turkey maneuvering to play a mediating role, which way will U.S. policy swing?

Democratic efforts to weigh in on Iraq policy could be gaining steam after the White House announced it has agreed with Iraq to a “general time horizon” for further troop drawdowns.

After years of unsuccessful attempts to legislate drawdowns and a change of mission for U.S. forces, top Democrats heralded a July 18 announcement that President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki have agreed to include an unspecified schedule for U.S. troop withdrawals as part of a pending bilateral security agreement.

The announcement is likely to spur current efforts to codify Iraq withdrawal timelines and congressional oversight of any U.S-Iraq security agreement as part of the defense authorization and appropriations bills.