On April 25, two days after President Obama announced that a U.S. drone strike accidentally killed two innocent hostages, Mark Mazzetti and Matt Apuzzo published a story in the New York Times about congressional and White House support for the CIA’s “targeted killing program.” A major point in the story was that some of the CIA officers who built the CIA’s drone program also led the CIA’s detention and interrogation program. 

I see the implications of the Trump interview a little differently than Ben does. First, Ben says that the only honorable thing for Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to do in light of Trump’s intemperate attacks is to resign.

This paper explores the role norms play in advancing U.S. interests in changing Chinese behavior in cyberspace.  It compares and contrasts U.S. efforts to achieve two norms:  (1) the U.N. Group of Governmental Experts’ consensus that international law applies in cyberspace; and (2) the U.S.-China understanding that neither State would pursue cyber-espionage for commercial advantages.  In contrast to prior studies that focus only on the behavior a norm requires, this paper employs a broader, process-based analysis.  That analysis offers a new framework for strategizing about the potential risks and rewards of pursuing different normative processes, whether in U.S. efforts to impact China’s behavior in cyberspace or vice-versa. 

The first signs of potential collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia emerge. State Department employees say they’re uncertain about the future of their work under the Trump administration. And the president is facing a crisis in North Korea as he prepares to meet with world leaders, including Vladimir Putin.