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.

While reading about the recent crisis in South Ossetia, Paul Krugman wondered if the second wave of globalization will share the fate of the first: world war.  A world in which the US isn't the only military force, argues Krugman, is a dangerous one.  Russia has proven itself willing to use gas as a political weapon, and China, emboldened by Russia's example, might invade Taiwan.  These nationalism-powered conflicts threaten the stability of our globalized world. 

I'm skeptical. 

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.

A stable Afghanistan requires Pakistan to curtail militancy on its side of the Afghan-Pakistani border. Washington, having doled out $8 billion in military aid to Pakistan since 9/11, wants proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Pakistan is pulling its weight. But fresh evidence illustrates that Pakistan's deeds do not match its reassuring words. Exhibit A: Pakistani peace deals with militant groups earlier this year precipitated a 40 percent increase in attacks in eastern Afghanistan. Exhibit B: U.S. forces in eastern Afghanistan face regular militant assaults emanating from Pakistan, most recently a Taliban attack on a remote outpost that killed nine American soldiers.

“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.

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.

Uniting Pakistan the military state and Pakistan the nascent democracy is our generation’s calling.

There are two Pakistans. The first is stuck in an illusion of undisturbed national stability and unity through military management; the second stands on the weak shoulders of a nascent democracy, perpetually insecure and sporadically functional.

For more than sixty years, Pakistan has struggled with its split personality, brought about by its military or political parties. Historically the United States has preferred the first Pakistan – managed by the military and governed by the free market. The challenge for today's generals and politicians is to find a way to merge, secure, and present the country in a way that attracts the better of the two Pakistans, and preserves U.S. support in the war on terror.

While Pakistani counterterrorism strategists wrestle with Al-Qaeda and its affiliates in the northwest tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda successfully applies strategic chaos to achieve its goals. Promoting religio-political and economic instability in Pakistan, Afghanistan and beyond, Al-Qaeda -- in sharp contrast to the appeal, capabilities and goals of past terrorist groups -- does not believe in eternal peace after a long, hard, bloody war. Instead, Al-Qaeda envisions a world held hostage to constant conflict where chaos delivers "perpetual chaos" until the Day of Judgment. Strategic chaos defines and supports Al Qaeda's goals, modus operandi and longevity. Victory against Al-Qaeda and affiliates rests upon understanding, exploiting and finally discrediting their doctrine of strategic chaos.