China is focused on solving the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue through talks and peaceful means, Chinese President Xi Jinping told U.S. President Donald Trump i

Washington officials hope to preserve America’s military dominance everywhere on earth, with the ability to defeat any nation anywhere at any time. That’s an attractive vision for policymakers used to basking in the world’s deference but is not necessary to protect the U.S.—its people and their territory, liberties, and prosperity. To the contrary, the tendency to treat advancing even the most peripheral interest as warranting war today means that America is never at peace.

Even before North Korea detonated its most powerful nuclear bomb yet, Japan was calling for moves to cut off its oil supply.Afterward, U.S. President Donald Tru

To follow a common security approach that recognizes the interrelations and interdependencies between countries, Washington must step back and reassess the moral and practical implications of its foreign-policy commandment “Do as I say, Not as I do” when it comes to nuclear weapons.

In many ways, the current nuclear standoff between North Korea and the U.S. can be traced back to the former’s inclusion into the UN in 1991. Establishing a geopolitically neutral “federation” among the Koreas would actually be a viable path of compromise.

The escalating crisis over North Korea means that all parties, including both China and the US, must step up their efforts to restrain Pyongyang, and to present a united front on the issue.

Building on the cooperation the U.S. and China have developed over the last two years on UN sanctions will be key to denuclearizing North Korea. However, the current sanctions also include loopholes China may need to work with the United States to close should North Korea conduct another nuclear or missile test.

President Donald Trump’s administration is looking for ways to pressure North Korea to stop developing a nuclear-weapons program, and some American analys

Recently, the US Secretaries of State and Defense announced a policy of “strategic accountability” on North Korea. What are the key components of this policy, and is it really anything new?