Norms v. National Security

Obama Says No to Landmines, with Steve Groves, National Review Online, September 29, 2014. "On March 6, 2014, America’s highest-ranking military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey, called anti-personnel landmines (APLs) “an important tool in the arsenal of the armed forces of the United States.” Yesterday, President Obama banned the armed forces from using them. Why? To comply with a treaty — the Ottawa Convention — that the United States hasn’t even ratified. The U.S. Senate has not given its advice and consent to the treaty, but the Obama administration still feels compelled, in the words of a State Department spokesman, to “underscore its commitment to the spirit and humanitarian aims of the Ottawa Convention.”

More Norm Talk at the UN

Obama’s UN Speech Reveals why Arms Trade Treaty is So Dangerous, Fox News, September 26, 2014. "Addressing the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, President Obama said that all nations “must meet our responsibility to observe and enforce international norms.” What he meant by that wasn’t exactly clear, starting with what those norms are, and who gets to define them. But that kind of thinking on the president’s part is precisely why the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is so bad for the United States."

Promoting the Obvious: Free Trade Between the US and the UK

Freedom from the EU: Why Britain and the U.S. Should Pursue a U.S.-U.K. Free Trade Area, with Nile Gardiner, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief, September 26, 2014. "A referendum on British membership in the European Union is scheduled for 2017. EU supporters argue that exit from the EU would hurt Britain’s economy and, in particular, its ability to negotiate trading arrangements with the rest of the world—a responsibility currently exercised by the EU on behalf of all of its member states. But there is every reason to believe that Britain, the world’s sixth-largest economy, would be able to negotiate trade agreements independently. If Britain does decide to leave the EU, one of its central priorities should be to negotiate a modern free trade area (FTA), based on sovereignty and freedom, with the United States. This is a goal that the U.S., which should abandon its policy of supporting the EU at the expense of the sovereignty of its member nations, should also champion."

The ATT Goes from Bad to Worse

Congress Should Stop Implementation of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief #4278, September 25, 2014. "On September 25, 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry signed the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). In the past year, the ATT has gone from bad to worse as the aims of its supporters and its failure in practice have become obvious. Yet the Obama Administration, without even transmitting the treaty to the Senate, has sought to implement it. Congress should hold hearings to reveal the extent to which U.S. policies have been shaped by the ATT and to ensure it is not implemented before it passes through the entire U.S. treaty process."

Winners and Losers in Scotland

The Scottish Referendum: Who Won, Who Lost, National Interest, September 24, 2014. "It seems churlish to speak of winners and losers today, but, after all, the point of voting is to pick winners. The most important winner, of course, is the Union itself. Scotland, too, is a winner. Apart from the fact that it would have been worse off outside the Union, it has demonstrated that it’s possible—as it has been for centuries—to be both Scottish and British."

In Syria, If It's Worth Doing, It's Worth Doing Poorly

In Syria, Obama Calls on the J.V. Team, Newsday, September 20, 2014. "While the president called the Islamists the junior varsity team in January, it's obvious that they are professionals at murder. I hate to be rude about the Syrian rebels, who are risking their lives. But it's not the Islamists who are the JV squad: it's our guys. That's why they need training. So the new plan is much the same as the old plan. It relies on others to do the dirty work and promises more than it can deliver. Unfortunately, the motto of the administration's approach to Syria has not changed: If a thing is worth doing, it's worth doing poorly."

The Faulty Geopolitical Case Behind TTIP

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): The Geopolitical Reality, with Nile Gardiner and Luke Coffey, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2953, September 17, 2014. "The United States and the European Union are negotiating a trade agreement—the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)—that is being hailed as the answer to the woes of the transatlantic relationship, as a solution to the EU’s economic difficulties, and as heralding the creation of a new institution that will reinvigorate the Western alliance. It is essential that both the geopolitical concerns that motivate support for a TTIP and the limits of a TTIP’s ability to improve U.S.–EU relations and address the rise of China be properly understood."

The Economic Case for and Against TTIP

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): Economic Benefits and Potential Risks, with Luke Coffey and Bryan Riley, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2952, September 17, 2014. "The United States and the European Union are negotiating a trade agreement—the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)—that politicians and commentators on both sides of the Atlantic hail as the answer to the woes of the transatlantic relationship, as a solution to the EU’s economic difficulties, and as heralding the creation of a new institution that will reinvigorate the Western alliance. But no U.S.–EU agreement can do all that has been claimed of the TTIP, and there are reasons to believe that its benefits have been oversold. The U.S. should support all measures that would promote growth and employment by increasing economic freedom, but it should not accept any agreement that could increase government regulation in the name of promoting free trade and create a transnational regulatory body that could infringe on U.S. sovereignty."

For Scotland, the Question of Prudence

Scotland’s Independence Vote: What thee United States Has at Stake, Big Peace, September 17, 2014. "No call for democratic self-government can leave Americans unmoved. But Americans also know that the Declaration of Independence cautions that “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.” The Anglo-Scottish Union is over 300 years old. The question of prudence is a serious one."

At the UN, No Room for Skeptics

Want to Know What U.N. Thinks of ‘Democracy’? Just Look at its Arms Trade Treaty, Foxnews.com, September 10, 2014. "While the ATT was negotiated at the U.N., it was pushed along by anti-gun groups. But the negotiations were also watched by U.S. and international organizations that were critical of the treaty, including the World Forum on Shooting Activities (WFSA) and my own employer, The Heritage Foundation. The U.N. generically calls these and other groups, regardless of their views on the treaty, “civil society.” But that is not how the U.N. wants to work. It pretends to support open and transparent processes, and to value input from everyone. But what it really wants is to pick groups who agree with it and define them alone as“civil society.”

A Rectification of Names

Call the Islamic State Murderers Instead, Newsday, September 8, 2014. "The murderers of journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley call themselves the Islamic State. And commentators reliably repeat that name. That's wrong -- and dangerous."