Nuclear Issues

"The process might still move forward if the Middle East were conceived of as three subregions: the Arab Maghreb (North Africa excluding Egypt); Israel and its immediate area; and the Persian Gulf. Such an approach—which would not replace but rather complement existing efforts to eliminate WMD—would enjoy three practical advantages. Diplomatic obstacles in each subregion would be minimized because a limited number of countries would be involved; neighboring countries' common interests would make trade-offs possible; and ambiguity and obfuscation would become more difficult."

"Because of the last four years, we face a world in which our enemies do not fear us, our friends do not believe they can trust us, and those who maneuver between the two camps feel that they will not get in trouble by crossing us. It is time, and more than time, to choose a different course."

"...[T]wo important issues i.e. the Arab-Israeli peace process and Iran's nuclear program, have the potentials of creating opportunity and establishing new rivalry between Iran and Egypt. Among the reasons the Egyptian public challenged the Mubarak regime was the country's inactive position on the peace process. A nationalistic-ideological government in Egypt will surely seek more active role of Egypt in the peace process. On the other side, during past years and in the course of the regional political-security developments, Iran has established and developed a strong and specific approach in influencing the peace process. Now Iran and the new government in Egypt should harmonize their policies so that they could make a new coalition to deal with the peace process."

WASHINGTON needs to learn to talk, listen, and engage more and condemn less.

"...the Bush administration's foreign policy rests on a deep misreading of contemporary world politics. Conducting foreign policy on the basis of flawed premises is like designing an airplane while ignoring gravity...."

After Iraq and Afghanistan, President Bush's foremost policy challenge is posed by rogue states, that is, states that threaten the United States and world peace.

If the US persists in enforcing regime change in Iraq, why not do so in every country where the ruler is odious and grossly mistreats his or her people?