A preview of world events in the coming week from CFR.org: The United States remembers the attacks of September 11, 2001; the U.S. Congress is expected to vote on Syria; and Australia holds general elections.

On September 4, 2013, the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations debated the resolution: "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons."

Gayle Tzemach-Lemmon discusses Salim Idris' potential trip to Washington.

"Don't say they didn't warn us," writes Gayle Tzemach-Lemmon on the continuing crisis in Syria.

Elliott Abrams says the United States must "punish and deter Assad or the damage to American credibility will be enormous."

Richard N. Haass says the British Parliament's rejection of a motion endorsing UK participation in expected military action against Syria is nothing less than stunning.

A preview of world events in the coming week from CFR.org: Anticipation mounts over outside military action in Syria; the G20 summit begins in St. Petersburg; and President Obama visits Sweden.

Despite his innate caution and usually sound political instincts, British Prime Minister David Cameron is gambling with his country's future.

Carla Robbins argues that ignoring the Kremlin and putting current U.S.-Russia relations on pause is not an option worth pursuing. She stresses the importance of publicly warning Russia of the damage done to its global reputation through current policies, and the need to engage with Russia in areas of common interest, such as Iran.

Much of the debate about China's rise in recent years has focused on the potential dangers China could pose as an eventual peer competitor to the United States bent on challenging the existing international order.

In my book Of Empires and Citizens, I argue that at the height of the period of authoritarian rule in the Middle East, Arab societies were divided between those people who benefited from their leaders' relationship with the United States, and therefore sought to preserve the dictatorships, and those who did not, and therefore sought democracy.

Ed Husain explains why Western intervention "will not change the tide of war in Syria," but will leave the United States responsible for instability in yet another Middle Eastern country.

On August 14, 2013, officals from North Korea and from South Korea met to discuss the reopening of Gaeseong (or Kaesŏng) Industrial Complex, which employed workers from both countries.

Julia Sweig argues that, while skepticism of military intervention is reasonable in normal times, the use of chemical weapons in Syria has changed the goalposts and demands action from the world. In spite of its painful memories of U.S. intervention in its own recent history, Latin America should invoke the doctrine of Responsibility while Protecting, and partner with Western leaders as a source of humanitarian aid and refugee assistance.

Micah Zenko responds to the New York Times Room for Debate blog question, "Is an Attack on Syria Justified?"

CFR President Richard N. Haass discusses U.S. interests and options amidst reports of chemical weapons used by the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

The Obama administration should use strikes to start talks in Syria, says Gayle Tzemach-Lemmon.

With the latest chemical-weapons attack in Syria, U.S. officials are talking about Obama's using military force, but with a diplomatic and humanitarian twist, writes Leslie H. Gelb.

"The Obama administration had a grand strategy in the Middle East. It was well intentioned, carefully crafted and consistently pursued. Unfortunately, it failed."

"Contrary to appearances, Germany is not simply receding ever deeper into itself. In fact, the Berlin Republic is quietly asserting itself and fleshing out its foreign policy. The unwillingness to act as France's cheerleader in the greater Mediterranean comes with the creeping recovery of self-confidence, and a desire to reposition itself vis-à-vis this historically French sphere of influence."