If there's one indisputable fact about this most polarizing of figures, it's that he is hard to get rid of -- and every retreat, even his most recent withdrawal from political life, lays the groundwork for an eventual counterattack.

Now, more than ever, the United States might be tempted to pull back from the world.

It's tempting to see the 9/11 attacks as having fundamentally changed U.S. foreign policy. It's also wrong.

In uncertain times, grand strategies are important because they help others interpret a country's behavior.

Henry Kissinger's new book argues that the United States should yield gracefully to China's rise; Aaron Friedberg's gives the opposite advice.

With China's clout growing, the international community needs to better understand China's strategic thinking.

A number of prominent figures -- political scientists, public intellectuals, politicians, historians, journalists, policymakers -- recommend books that shed light on some aspect of the world ahead.

The next U.S. president will face a more difficult opening-day set of global problems than any of his predecessors since World War II.

The United States' unipolar moment is over. International relations in the twenty-first century will be defined by nonpolarity.

The United States needs a foreign policy that is based on reality and is loyal to American values. The next U.S. president needs to send a clear signal to the world that America has turned the corner and will once again be a leader rather than a unilateralist loner. Getting out of Iraq and restoring our reputation are necessary first steps toward a new strategy of U.S. global engagement and leadership.

The Bush administration's arrogant bunker mentality has been counterproductive at home and abroad. American foreign policy needs to change its tone and attitude, open up, and reach out. In particular, it should focus on eliminating Islamist terrorists, stabilizing Iraq, containing Iran, and toughening its stance with Pakistan.

Deep divisions at home about the nature of the United States' engagement with the world threaten to produce failed leadership abroad -- and possibly isolationism. To steady U.S. global leadership and restore consensus to U.S. foreign policy, U.S. commitments overseas must be scaled back to a more politically sustainable level.

Iowa caucus victories for Democrat Barak Obama and Republican Mike Huckabee reshuffle some analysts' assumptions about Campaign 2008.

With presidential politics already coloring all aspects of international policymaking, CFR.org launches Campaign 2008 to track the tangle of foreign policy and national security issues throughout the election cycle.

U.S. policy toward Africa under President Bush has stressed development and humanitarian aid. But recent U.S. military action in Somalia raises the specter of a more intrusive approach, particularly in the Horn of Africa. Is it a harbinger of things to come?

Nikolas Gvosdev and Ray Takeyh argue that the justifying of America's Libya campaign solely on humanitarian grounds marked a fundamental break with past U.S. policy prescriptions for such military interventions.

Richard N. Haass argues that the United States should adopt a doctrine of Restoration as its guiding foreign policy framework, focusing on "restoring this country's strength and replenishing its economic, human, and physical resources."

Charles Kupchan states, "Tectonic shifts in international affairs and in political and economic conditions within the United States call for reconsideration of the first principles of American grand strategy—the fundamental tenets guiding the nation's statecraft."

Richard N. Haass says a doctrine of restoration can strengthen the U.S. position abroad by focusing on nation building -- at home.

CFR's Noah Feldman examines the American urge to export democracy.