The U.S.- and Russia-brokered deal to have Syria surrender its chemical weapons is proceeding on schedule.
Something very strange has been happening during President Obama's second term. It's called dissent.
John Kerry strikes a deal with the Russians to avert airstrikes.
Some argue that the U.S. will damage its reputation if it backs down on Syria. The academic evidence doesn't really bear that out.
The real cost of destroying Assad's chemical weapons is watching him crush the opposition and retain power
Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, takes a look at Russia's thinking on Syria.
What happens when international diplomacy stops being polite and starts getting...weird?
David Bosco, who literally wrote the book on the U.N. Security Council, on how the body is handling the Syria situation.
Yes, it'll be hard to quickly destroy Assad's entire chemical weapons stockpile. But what's the alternative?
There's a reason Russia and Syria are open to a deal on disarmament.
The vote is off, as the White House has, unexpectedly, stumbled on a better path forward.
This was a speech that combined a very bad argument for pursuing strikes against Syria with a very good one.
The full text of Obama's primetime speech.
Judging from the latest Pew poll, the White House hasn't exactly succeeded in selling the public on military action against Syria.
If Assad will really sign the treaty against chemical weapons, the White House just achieved its goal.
There's no one arguments for striking Syria. There are many. And some of them contradict each other.
Most security experts missed the environmental roots of Syria's current crisis.
A few days of bad press coverage is a lot better than a few years of a bad war.
The world's oil markets are losing their capacity to adjust to even minor disruptions. That's not a good sign.
A new Gallup poll takes a closer look at the reasons military action in Syria is so unpopular.