After their loss last year, Republicans are grappling over what to do next -- and when it comes to foreign policy, small-government conservatives worried about debt are squaring off against big-military conservatives fearful of defense cuts. Fortunately, the GOP does not need a total makeover; what it needs is a renegotiated modus vivendi between the two competing camps, each of which has valuable things to teach the other.

The United States can no longer afford a world-spanning foreign policy.

One of the most important figures in Obama's administration will be his national security adviser. An examination of past advisers shows how to get the job right—or wrong.

Since the Democrats regained control of Congress, the Hill has been alive with the sound of hearings. Congress' earlier slumber and recent awakening should come as no surprise: for the last six decades, the partisan composition of Congress has defined the politics of war. Now facing a Democratic majority, President George W. Bush will find it far more difficult to stay in Iraq.

The top U.S. military and diplomatic officials in Iraq will tell Congress of security improvements and scattered political progress, but many lawmakers want to hear an exit strategy. 

President Bush's farewell State of the Union address was marked by a call for Congress to unite behind his Iraq policy and curtail partisanship.

Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Mike Huckabee triumphed in Iowa’s caucuses, vowing change at a time of deepening economic concerns.

Aside from Iraq, Congress will be the scene of likely sparring over initiatives on domestic surveillance, Guantanamo detainees, energy security, and trade.

U.S. and Iraqi lawmakers prepare to recess with little sign of compromise on critical Iraq policy issues.

The collapse of global trade talks prompted some analysts to pronounce the WTO’s Doha round dead. Counterintuitively, some free-trade hawks say this might not be such a bad thing.

The current Iraq funding debate pits Democrats against Republicans but the fault lines are starting to spread within the parties as well.

American politicians finally agree on the need for benchmarks to judge progress in Iraq, but disagree sharply over linking those milestones to future funding or a timetable for withdrawal.

Democrats are considering how far to take their standoff with President Bush on Iraq war funding now that he's vetoed a bill that would require a drawdown to begin early next year.

A wave of bombs in Baghdad overshadows the current standoff over war funding. Despite meeting with congressional Democrats, President Bush has threatened to veto any bill on troop limits.

The surge to secure Baghdad is still in its infancy but has shown limited signs of success, even as resentment of the war grows among Iraqis and Americans.

The House bill calling on President Bush to bring troops home from Iraq next year sets the stage for a showdown on management of the war.

With insurgent attacks growing more coordinated, Congress debates whether to condone President Bush’s latest plan to secure Iraq with more troops.

President Bush’s decision to send more troops to Iraq has sparked a clash with a war-weary Congress, and his "surge" policy continues to draw fire at hearings. Yet while Congress controls a number of levers, its Democratic leaders appear intent on taking only a symbolic stand against the new policy.

The new Democratic Congress is looking to spend political capital with a flurry of legislation on everything from green energy initiatives to homeland security. But lawmakers will be spectators when President Bush unveils his new plan for Iraq.

With a new team of Iraq advisers emerging, President Bush looks set to call for a “surge” of more U.S. forces to Iraq. Some critics, including newly empowered congressional Democrats, think the emphasis should be on redeployment from Iraq.