British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was scheduled to visit Moscow this week. His trip has now been cancelled, partly because he wishes to intensify diplomatic pressure on Russia, but also because he is keen to persuade the new US administration about the virtues of foreign and security policy coordination.
It is tempting to draw immediate conclusions about the US response to the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria. However, the question is whether the launching of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base constitutes Trump’s doctrine for interventions and foreign policy. This is somewhat hard to determine.
In the digital age, it is often necessary to make compromises between cost and security. For the US Army, miscalculating the balance of this compromise could have serious implications for national security.
Mechanisms for dispute resolution and sanctions ‘snap back’ will be amongst the most important of the new Iran deal. They are also the most difficult to understand, and contain potentially problematic areas of ambiguity.
Until last week, the UK government’s position on terrorist-related kidnap-for-ransom (KfR) mirrored that of the United States: no payments and no concessions. But the result of a six month White House review of US hostage response has created a dilemma for the prime minister.