The Man Who Shaped Washington’s View of the Middle East

When talk show host Stephen Colbert was looking for someone to explain the U.S. war with Iran to his Late Show audience in early March, he turned to Brett McGurk, who had served as a key Middle East advisor to four U.S. presidents.

“The case I don’t think has been made to the American people,” McGurk, now a venture capitalist and CNN analyst, told Colbert. “Before launching a military operation … a president has to be clear in his own mind of what he wants to achieve and how to achieve it. And that’s not always the strong suit” of U.S. President Donald Trump, he said.

McGurk was Colbert’s go-to on the subject of war in the Middle East for a reason. The 52-year-old, while little known outside policymaking circles, has held a uniquely enduring role in U.S. foreign policy over two decades. In a period of heightened polarization and personnel shifts between administrations, McGurk has survived—and thrived—in both Republican and Democratic presidencies. With few interruptions, he has taken on an increasing share of responsibilities for Washington’s Middle East policy starting with the George W. Bush presidency and then going through the Obama years, the turmoil of Trump’s first term, and finally the Biden administration. Agreeing or disagreeing with McGurk’s body of work is, in a sense, a Rorschach test for whether one thinks U.S. policy in the Middle East this century has been a success or failure...

AOC Meets World

When Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez delivered her first major foreign-policy remarks during a panel discussion at the Munich Security Conference in February, a moderator asked her whether the United States should send troops to Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion. After some pauses, she said: “What we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s answer reflected long-standing U.S. policy on this thorny issue. But explaining strategic ambiguity toward Taiwan doesn’t make for a straightforward sound bite, and critics of the 36-year-old congresswoman went on the attack. “AOC, she was unable to answer a simple question,” U.S. President Donald Trump said. The New York Times and Washington Post derided Ocasio-Cortez’s “stumbles,” ditching standard practice to transcribe her “um”s and “ah”s.

National-security experts saw Ocasio-Cortez’s answer as a misstep in part because she has previously been enigmatic about her foreign policy. She turned down a 2020 invitation to speak in Munich, according to correspondence viewed by Foreign Policy. At the time, she seemed squarely focused on delivering for her New York district.

Ocasio-Cortez’s decision to appear at this year’s conference came amid growing speculation that she will seek higher office in 2028, whether as a contender for senator or even president. Munich is a well-known practice stage for ambitious politicians, and her remarks there attempted to define what a progressive U.S. foreign policy might look like under her leadership. The core question, however, is how she would transform such ideas into policy.

Foreign Policy spoke with 25 current and former advisors, progressive activists, and think tank experts in Ocasio-Cortez’s orbit to map out her views on the Middle East, Latin America, and the world after Trump. (Ocasio-Cortez declined an interview request for this story.) As her star rises within the Democratic Party, some clues about her worldview are starting to emerge... Keep reading.

Britain’s New Spy Chief Has a New Mission

For a supposedly secret organization, Britain’s foreign intelligence service spends a lot of time honing its public profile. Key messages emphasize the relevance, effectiveness, and modern management style of the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), colloquially known as MI6. Forget the James Bond films, with their flamboyant stunts and louche sexual antics, or the starchy, tweedy, more realistic world of John le Carré’s George Smiley novels, where espionage was the British establishment’s shadowy outstation, never publicly mentioned by name. Today’s SIS advertises itself as a mirror of modern Britain: diverse, inclusive, and classless. If you want to join, you do not wait for a tap on the shoulder from an Oxbridge don; you go to the website. The service’s former boss (known as “C”), Sir Richard Moore, even coined the tag “#ForgetJamesBond” on a post on X about family-friendly careers at MI6.

Some might wonder, therefore, if the appointment of Blaise Metreweli, the first woman to lead SIS, is part of this image campaign. She was showcased (under a pseudonym of “Ada”) in a flattering Financial Times profile in 2022 of the up-and-coming women who, at the time, occupied three out of the four top deputy roles in the service. Moore had repeatedly made it clear that he wanted a woman to succeed him—a case of life following art, given that 007’s boss has been played by Judi Dench in eight Bond films since 1995.

But attributing her elevation largely to her gender would be a mistake. For a start, Metreweli had a distinguished operational career, ending up as head of “Q” branch, which deals with science and technology. A monicker originating from the Bond films, Q is now established parlance for the British spy agency’s inventors of nifty gadgets. Remember 007’s Aston Martin in Goldfinger, which came with built-in machine guns, an oil slick dispenser, and an ejector seat? In contrast to the fictional car, the real-life counterparts are miracles of miniaturization and concealment. Some have wondered if Metreweli’s only distinctive fashion trait, a penchant for large brooches, could be a nod to the long history of jewelry as spy gear.... Keep reading.

The People Behind The Headlines