Earnest take: I think it’s probably not healthy for the practice of democratic self-government that so many people have developed strong rooting interests in elections in countries they don’t live in.

Marco Rubio still owes Europe answers about America's intentions, argues Ivan Krastev in his latest piece for @ftopinion as.ft.com/r/7b01926d-a433-48…

RS is hiring! We are looking for a gumshoe reporter who can break news and help drive the foreign-policy conversation in Washington. Apply here: jobs.lever.co/quincyinst/d8d…

A better answer @MattDuss: Democrats (and Republicans) should work to fix whatever is holding back the @BoardOfPeace from doing the job the world expects of it. For starters, you're calling them corrupt when they've spent almost no money. There's a better way to make this work.

In a piece published in Foreign Affairs by the Foundation for Defense of Democracy’s Miad Maleki, suspiciously published a mere 48 hours after the U.S. blockade of Iran was imposed (and also published one within HOURS), we see the REAL goal of the United States’ economic warfare campaign against Iran: “Within weeks of a blockade, the country could run out of food…” “A blockade will inhibit Iranian exports of all kinds—oil being the most important, but also petrochemicals—as well as imports of much of the country’s grain.” “Iran is the largest importer of bulk grain and oilseed in the Middle East. Approximately 14 million of the 30 million tons of grain imported into Gulf markets annually are destined for Iran—all of it seaborne and all of it dependent on passage through the Strait of Hormuz. When the strait shut, grain deliveries to Iran’s primary port, Bandar Imam Khomeini, all but stopped.” “Pharmaceutical and medical supply chains faced similar disruptions.” First of all, let’s take a moment to acknowledge how CLEARLY one of the primary goals of the U.S. blockade is to create food and medical supply shortages within Iran. Secondly, let’s take a moment to acknowledge how comically STUPID the Foundation for Defense of Democracy has been throughout the ENTIRE Iran War, including the claim that “within weeks of the blockade, Iran could run out of food”… A) You’re sick. B) You’re stupid.

Barack Obama decided to hit Pete Hegseth with the elbow from the top rope. Absolutely brutal takedown.

I'm not feeling optimistic about our nation's future.

🚨Scoop: U.S. intelligence finds Iran has "substantially increased" its efforts to target American diplomats & officials in the Middle East and beyond, with lethal plots reaching "advanced stages," per memo to Secretary of State Rubio. My story on @axios axios.com/2026/10/24/iran-wa…

The new issue of Tribune is out soon. - Andreas Malm on Trump II - @comrade_kumar_ on chokepoint resistance - @nihalist___ on Zionism - @joshua_craze on Sudan - @LJFinlayson on Pal Action - Dispatches from ten countries in the US crosshairs Get it here: tribunemag.co.uk/subscribe/?…

The CEO of the biggest drone company in Israel says that his objective is to recreate Ender's Game, the book where the main character thinks he's playing a video game but actually commits genocide

Michael Walzer published “Just and Unjust Wars,” an attempt to delineate the rights and wrongs of warfare in both its causes and its conduct, in 1977. In the nearly 50 years since, no other book on the subject has matched its influence. The precepts are not complicated: it is just to defend your country from an invasion and it is unjust to invade a country that has not attacked you—although Walzer does allow for exceptions, mostly for humanitarian causes. It is just to assume certain risks to avoid civilian casualties and it is unjust to bomb towns indiscriminately to compel an enemy to surrender. The justice of going to war—what philosophers call jus ad bellum—is separate from jus in bello, the justice of how a war is fought. The war in Gaza has made Walzer rethink one of the book’s fundamental principles. “The wall between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, which had sustained his theory for almost half a century, was no longer sturdy,” Jordi Graupera writes. As Walzer said to him, “There is a sense in which the carnage of Gaza, the ongoing carnage, simply made the war unjust.” Read about why a philosopher of war is now reconsidering his seminal work: newyorkermag.visitlink.me/T7…