SALAH OMAR/AFP/Getty Images

Earlier this month, the International Criminal Court charged Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir with genocide for atrocities committed in the ongoing Darfur conflict. Proclaiming his innocence, Bashir responded in the way that any peace-loving leader concerned over his citizens would -- by threatening to murder even more people.

The ICC's announcement was by no means binding. The United Nations Security Council has split over a proposal by Libya and South Africa to prevent Bashir's indictment. The United States, Britain and France appeared to be quite skeptical of this plan, but South Africa has argued that prosecuting Bashir would jeopardize African Union efforts at peacekeeping in the region. South African President Thabo Mbeki explained that the peace process "require[s] very serious input by Bashir" and said "it doesn't help at this time to be considering these indictments."

The only thing less surprising than South Africa's president trying to give a free ride to someone who has committed war crimes against his own people is that they're joined on this mission by the humanitarians in Beijing. China's envoy to Sudan warned last week that the ICC's steps and Bashir's indictment could imperil the peace process in Darfur.

This logic actually makes sense. Bashir, China, and passive African leaders have been instrumental in the implementation of Darfur's genocide, so it follows that they play an active role in solving it, and it's even more important that they avoid repercussions for their actions.

DIETER NAGL/AFP/Getty Images

When Nicolas Sarkozy appointed Medecins-Sans-Frontieres founder and lefty human rights activist Bernard Kouchner as his foreign minister, it seemed to many like an odd fit. But the Times' Charles Bremmer's report from an afternoon spent with the minister at the Quai d'Orsay makes it clear what the two men share: hyperactivity bordering on attention deficit disorder and a massively inflated sense of their own importance:

Ever passionate in his speech, Kouchner says working for Sarko is "exaltant" -- thrilling -- and fulfilling even if he does not always agree with him. He believes that he and Sarko have revolutionized French diplomacy. Gesturing across the lawn at the grand ministry, he said: "We have broken with the immobilisme -- the passivity -- of the past. We have imposed deep change on the state of mind of this great house... The era of diplomacy without policy is over."

KCNA/AFP/Getty Images

Speculation is growing that Kim Jong Il will soon make a few pitstops around the Pacific. First up for the North Korean president? Beijing. China's Vice President Xi Jinping, who visited Kim in Pyongyang last week, reportedly asked Kim to attend the Olympics opening ceremony -- though there's been no word yet on Kim's response. Another unconfirmed Kim stop is Vietnam, where North Korea's ties have grown closer in recent months.

For Dear Leader, Beijing probably looks like a good platform for improving his global image and expressing support for China, his chief patron. And U.S.-North Korean relations, which have warmed of late, could be advanced by a hint of greater openness from Pyongyang. (Wouldn't it be interesting if Kim rubbed elbows with Dubya at the games?) There's even talk of the two Korean teams marching together at the opening ceremony in a "gesture of peace."

I'm guessing that Kim's real motive would be aid, much of which comes from China and Vietnam. Food shortages have prompted Kim and Co. to slash citizens' rations in recent months, prompting fears of massive starvation. Kim's recently strained relations with South Korea, which provides hundreds of millions of dollars of yearly aid to the North, certainly makes it necessary for the despot to seek help elsewhere.

STR/AFP/Getty Images

Even as a power-sharing deal between President Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF party and Morgan Tsvangirai's Opposition for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe seems to be moving forward, deep doubts still remain.

EU leaders don't seem impressed by the negotiations. Yesterday, they slapped an additional 37 people and four companies, all of whom are now blacklisted, with new sanctions including restrictions on banking and travel. This brings Zimbabwe's blacklist total -- which already included Mugabe and several members of his cabinet from earlier sanctions in 2002 -- up to 172 people.

Meanwhile, Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga -- who was in a similar position as Tsvangirai during Kenya's disputed election last December -- has said that a "peaceful, decent exit" would be appropriate for Mugabe.

Barack Obama won't be speaking at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin after all, but his upcoming trip to Europe is still a huge deal.

What should the senator be thinking about before he goes? Here are a few diplomatic overtures I'd recommend:

• Acknowledge the importance of U.S.-European relations. Many of your outlined goals for making the United States safer -- e.g. defeating al Qaeda, stabilizing Afghanistan, and preventing Iran from getting the bomb -- are going to require close cooperation with Europe. You don't have a great record of paying attention to the region, having been there once in the past decade (and having never called a single meeting of the Senate Foreign Relation's subcommittee on Europe). Put some meat on your vow to reach out to America's closest allies, but don't get too lovey-dovey. Proclaiming "Je suis un Français" in front of the Arc de Triomphe would probably hurt your chances in November.
• Listen to what Europeans tell you about integration and the thorny issues, like immigration, that go along with it. Your rhetoric on NAFTA show that you've got some learning to do here, and Europeans have been doing the whole "regional integration" thing for decades. But don't be afraid to challenge European mindsets, either -- sadly, many still think a minority candidate could never be elected in their country.
• Stopping in London, Paris, and Berlin is all well and good, but passing up Brussels? The heart of the EU is where the region's major policies -- like those on trade, immigration, and the environment -- are actually molded into shape. Be careful about weighing in on contentious topics like the Lisbon Treaty, but a trip to EU headquarters next time would send the right signal. Plus, you could work in a plea for unity given the ongoing turmoil over the Belgian PM's resignation. Just don't get caught drinking any Stella Artois or you can kiss Missouri goodbye.
• And hey, how about a shoutout to the new EU members? Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic and other eastern European nations have experienced major economic growth in the past several years and have seriously stepped up their trade with the United States since 2000. It's too late to add any more stops to your itinerary, but acknowledging these rising European stars would underline your call for "supporting Europe's strategy of enlargement."

KAZUHIRO NOGI/AFP/Getty Images

This week, an elite team of Iranians landed in Utah and began training exercises. Yet the act sparked no alarm. Why?

The 25 men are members of the Iranian national basketball team, invited to participate in the NBA summer league in Utah as they prepare for their first Olympics in 60 years. Meanwhile, the 18-year old captain of the Iranian junior national team has been training in Texas, hoping to become the first of his countrymen to play college hoops in the United States.

Despite the bluster and bellicose rhetoric on both sides, this basketball diplomacy is one of several recent signs of greater U.S. engagement with Tehran. U.S. Undersecretary of State William J. Burns, who is heading to Geneva for international talks with Iran this weekend, told Congress last week that the athletic outreach, which includes hosting the Iranian table tennis and soccer teams, is part of a broader effort to repair relations with the Iranian people:

Over the long-term, we hope to build connections among our people through educational, cultural, and other exchanges which can overcome 30 years of estrangement that has severed links between our societies.

Hopefully, basketball is just the beginning. These types of arrangements don't get the same types of headlines as sanctions or cigarettes, but they're an important piece of the diplomatic puzzle. And after all, there's really nothing for the United States to lose -- other than perhaps, embarassingly, a basketball game.

This is an interesting new development:

In a break with past Bush administration policy, a top U.S. diplomat will for the first time join colleagues from other world powers at a weekend meeting with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator... William Burns, America's third highest-ranking diplomat, will attend talks with the Iranian envoy, Saeed Jalili, in Switzerland on Saturday aimed at persuading Iran to halt activities that could lead to the development of atomic weapons, a senior U.S. official told the AP on Tuesday.

I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet for this move. As the official told the AP, "This is a one-time event and [Burns] will be there to listen, not negotiate... [O]ur terms for negotiations remain the same: Iran must suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities."

The diplomats will be looking to hear Iran's answer to the latest package of incentives offered by the P5+1 (the permanent five members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany). Judging by the Islamic Republic's initial response (pdf), we're likely to hear a lot of bluster and claims that Iran is being treated unfairly. But who knows? Maybe Burns's presence could change the dynamic.

ALI YUSSEF/AFP/Getty Images

The nonpartisan Center for U.S. Global Engagement released a new poll this morning, examining the attitudes of active and recently retired military officers toward non-military tools such as diplomacy and development. The survey found that a "significant majority of officers surveyed embrace a new paradigm in which strengthened diplomacy and development assistance are important companions to traditional military tools for achieving America's national security goals."

Intrigued, I dug up FP's U.S. Military index from the March/April edition, which surveyed active and retired officers on the current state of the U.S. military. While the polls were designed with different aims in mind, I found an interesting discrepancy between two smiliar sections.

From the Center for U.S. Global Engagement:

In evaluating steps the United States could take to achieve our strategic goals and improve national security, officers in our survey rank “strengthening our diplomatic efforts and cooperation with other countries” (83% very/fairly high priority) on par with “increasing counter-insurgency training for our troops” (87%) and “improving our military’s rapid response capabilities” (81%).

From FP:

Below is a list of things that could potentially assist the U.S. military in winning the Global War on Terror. Please choose the TWO most important things you believe the United States government must do to win the war on terror.
31% More robust diplomatic tools
73% Improve intelligence
21% Increase the size of U.S. ground forces
19% Increase the number of troops with foreign language skills
38% Further increase the size of Special Operations Forces
13% Develop a cadre of operational, deployable civilian experts
14% Increase spending on economic development assistance programs

While the officers polled in the Center for U.S. Global Engagement survey seemed to place diplomacy on the same tier as the use of force, the FP index ranks diplomacy as a distant third. What explains the disparity? Several factors could be at work.

First, the two polls have different demographics. The Center for U.S. Global Engagement surveyed 606 commissioned officers, including 499 active duty offices and 107 who retired since Sept. 11, 2001. FP, on the other hand, polled more than 3,400 officers, 71 percent of whom had retired more than 10 years ago. It's likely the older officers may support more traditional military methods.

More significantly, the Center for U.S. Global Engagement survey allowed officers to rate each strategy in terms of priority, but FP forced respondents to choose the two most important. My guess is that limiting the options forced officers to make a deliberate decision, and when faced with a hard choice the officers chose traditional methods and force over the non-military tools that the Center for U.S. Global Engagement poll highlights.

I'd be curious to see how the results of the Center for U.S. Global Engagement poll would have looked if respondents were faced with the same constraints as the FP index. I'm also curious if this "hard choices" theory explains how budgetary decisions (funding force over diplomacy) are made.

KAMARUL AKHIR/AFP/Getty Images

As the "elite 8" wrapped up an 18-course dinner in Hokkaido earlier this week, members of the developing countries summit, or "D-8," were also focusing on food -- or rather, the lack of it. Leaders of member nations Indonesia and Malaysia spoke out Wednesday about the need to curb biofuel production. Indonesian Prime Minister Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was blunt:

The idea is to reduce greenhouse gases and to wean themselves away from dependence on fossil fuels... It is not a good idea: it has only worsened the global food crisis."

Yudhoyono knows a thing or two about this problem firsthand. Indonesia has lost vast swathes of rainforests due to the production of palm oil, an increasingly popular biofuel. But while a little hypocrisy might make his words ring hollow, it doesn't make him wrong.

As FP's own Editor in Chief Moisés Naím tells us, increased food demand from developing countries is hardly to blame for the global food crisis. The real culprit is biofuel production, he aruges, and the government policies that promote it at the expense of crops for human consumption. Biofuels may account for as much as 75 percent of the global increase in food prices since 2002, according to the latest World Bank estimate.

The G-8, to its credit, had something to say about the crisis. Problem is, as usual the group didn't address the real policy problem -- it only "requested" that developed countries open their food stockpiles. Quick fixes, though, aren't going to feed the hungry for long. G-8 countries need to brainstorm feasible, long-term policies. Here's a healthy start: Stop dumping millions of dollars into subsidizing biofuels before this man-made disaster spins out of control.

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

The White House is scrambling to contain a diplomatic fiasco after an official briefing book distributed to reporters at this week's G8 summit contained a not very flattering description of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and his country that was apparently culled from an online encyclopedia:

"Berlusconi was one of the most controversial leaders in the history of a country known for governmental corruption and vice,'' reads the profile. Primarily a businessman with massive holdings and influence in international media, he was regarded by many as a political dilettante who gained his high office only through use of his considerable influence on the national media until he was forced out of office in 2006.''

The profile goes on to say that Berlusconi is is "despised by many but respected by some for his bella figura [beautiful image]."

We may have taken a few shots at Berlusconi around here, but obviously this is no way for the White House to treat the U.S.'s staunchest European ally. And if they must, at least do it right and make fun of his tan.

DMITRY ASTAKHOV/AFP/Getty Images

While President Bush is spending his birthday week with "smart guy" Dmitry Medvedev, his secretary of state is embarking on you might call a tour of the front lines of Western-Russia tension. Tomorrow, Secretary Rice travels to Prague to formally sign an agreement on the construction of a U.S. missile-defense radar system in the Czech Republic. Later in the week, she heads to Georgia, an American ally locked in a standoff with Russia over its increasingly violent breakaway provinces.

Russia strongly opposes the building of the missile-defense shield and the Foreign Ministry has warned that "appropriate steps" will be taken to punish the Czechs. Since the Russians' amped-up support for the Georgian provinces began as retaliation for Western recognition of Kosovo, it's safe to assume they don't make such threats idly. But compared with historically unstable Geogia, there's not much Russia could do to push around the Czech Republic, a country where Moscow hasn't held much sway since the Velvet Revolution of 1989.

In fact, it's clear Czech leaders are excited to be under the U.S. military's protective wing, and the same goes for Georgia's efforts to join NATO. Poland, which the U.S. hopes will also host part of the missile defense system, is still holding out, but that seems to be mostly about the Poles negotiating a better deal.

These countries, even if purely for cynical reasons, see cooperating with the U.S. as a strategic advantage. Russia, on the other hand, only seems to influence other nations by undermining their governments or shutting off their energy supplies. This can work in bordering countries like Georgia or Ukraine, but places like the Czech Republic and Poland no longer have to fear Russian tanks rolling down the street.

There's a lesson here: For all the talk of the Putin/Medvedev tandem's international assertiveness, they seem to lose a lot more battles than they win. And despite everything that has gone wrong in the last eight years, the United States still seems to be much better at making and keeping friends than the Russians.

Junko Kimura/Getty Images

Talk about starting off on the wrong foot. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and new Russian President Dimitry Medvedev met for the first time today at the G-8 Summit in Japan, on the heels of a report that British security forces consider Russia the third most serious threat facing the country.

According to The Times of London, only al Qaeda's terrorist threat and Iran's nuclear program are seen to be more dangerous:

The services are understood to fear that Russia's three main intelligence agencies have flooded the country with agents, The Times understands. There is reported to be deep irritation within the services that vital resources are having to be diverted to deal with industrial and military espionage by the Russians

Relations between the two countries have deteriorated since the 2006 poisoning of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko in London, allegedly at the hands of an ex-KGB agent whom Russia refuses to extradite. The issue apparently caused a row between Tony Blair and Vladimir Putin at last year's G-8 summit, and was a topic of disucussion at today's talks.

No word so far as to whether Brown and Medvedev have hit it off better than their predecessors, only that there were some "sharp exchanges" between the two.

In the harshest criticism yet of the stolen election in Zimbabwe, neighboring Botswana called today for the African Union to ban Mugabe from its meetings:

In our considered view, it therefore follows that the representatives of the current government in Zimbabwe should be excluded from attending SADC (Southern African Development Community) and African Union meetings," a text of summit remarks by Vice President Mompati Merafhe said.

"Their participation in the meetings of the two organisations would give unqualified legitimacy to a process which cannot be considered legitimate."

"Botswana's position is that such a scenario would be unacceptable."

Unconfirmed reports claim that Nigeria has also refused to recognize Mugabe's government.

Botswana's stand came during closed-door proceedings today at the AU summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. It remains to be seen what effect it will have on Zimbabwe, but it's good to see that some rulers in Africa appear to be showing a little spine.

They'll need it. Mugabe has been defiant over last Friday's fraudulent election, where he was the only candidate running and many citizens were threatened with violence if they did not vote for the 84-year-old ruler. Responding to international criticism today, a Mugabe spokesman told the United States and other Western states to "go hang a thousand times."

State.gov

This may be the fresh approach American foreign policy has been looking for. According to The Miami Herald, U.S. Amb. James Cason has become a singing sensation in Paraguay after learning the native Guaraní language and recording an album of indigenous folk songs.

Cason, who became ambassador to Paraguay in 2005, has become quite the hit. His songs are in heavy rotation on local radio stations and he drew 1,000 to a sold-out downtown concert. He's used the proceeds from the concert and album sales to raise over $20,000 for English-language education scholarships, gaining plenty of attention from the locals along the way:

He's been on TV and in all the newspapers,'' said Nelson Viveros, 16, who traveled to meet the ambassador recently in Encarnación, by the Argentina border. "It's strange, but people love it.''

Not everyone is convinced. One Paraguyan senator, who has asked Paraguay's legislature to denounce Cason, said the diplomat "sings horribly and his pronunciation of Guaraní words is stammering. It is an offense to the Paraguayan people."

U.S. State Department

The U.S. embassy in Cairo is a fortress-like compound, sequestered in the leafy, decaying neighborhood of Garden City along the east bank of the Nile. Merely to stand before the outer blast wall, you have to pass through a security checkpoint and explain your business.

But maybe the U.S. mission to Egypt isn't as impregnable as it seems. A body was recently discovered on the embassy's lush grounds, and Margaret Scobey, the new U.S. ambassador, has demanded a full-scale investigation. The body was sent out for autopsy to experts in Cairo and swiftly returned to the United States for burial.

Thing is, it's the ambassador's dog that we're talking about, not a person. The animal might have died accidentally after eating poison intended for feral cats. But Scobey wants to make sure, pan-Arab daily al-Hayat reports:

Americans in Egypt say that the ambassador's state of extreme anger has forced the embassy's security to cooperate [with] Egyptian authorities in spending considerable time on proving that the incident was not a premeditated attack and that the embassy's security measures, employees and the ambassador's home and household are safe. After all, a successful attempt to murder the ambassador's dog sends a message that it is possible to commit the same crime against Americans working at the ambassador's home or against the ambassador herself.

(Hat tip: Brian Whitaker)

VADIM KRAMER/AFP/Getty Images

Still reeling from Irish voters' rejection of the Lisbon Treaty last week, EU bigwigs are now focusing on the Czech Republic, another country that has yet to ratify the treaty and appears in no hurry to do so. Badly in need of a victory, French President Nicolas Sarkozy flew to Prague yesterday in a likely futile bid to try to nudge the reluctant Czechs to ratify as quickly as possible.

There are a few reasons to be skeptical about Lisbon's chances in the Czech Republic. First, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, though mostly a ceremonial figure, is one of Europe's leading EU skeptics and said last week that Irish voters should be congratulated for defeating what he called an "elitist artificial project."

More importantly, Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek, who nominally supports the treaty, is taking heat from within his fragile center-right coalition and will likely stall ratification as long as possible. There's also speculation that Topolánek and his party are trying to stall ratification until after the Czechs get their crack at the EU presidency in January. (Under the new treaty, meetings would be chaired by the new, permanent European Council president, not rotating member states.)

France's hard-sell tactics may also be backfiring. Diplomats say that French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner's involvement in the lead-up to the Irish vote was counterproductive for the "yes" camp there. And Czech politicians aren't happy about Sarkozy's diplomatic offensive.

It certainly makes sense that the Irish and the Czechs don't appreciate being pushed around by "old Europe." But I find it ironic that two of the countries that have benefited the most from EU membership might be shutting the door on its future development.

This is what it's like to be the envoy of a lame duck. Time's Tim McGirk reports from Israel on U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's latest trip:

On Sunday, Rice just passed through Jerusalem again. Ghosted through might be a better description since this time there was no fanfare, no motorcades snarling up the city’s traffic, and the lady couldn't even book a room in her usual hotel, the David Citadel. She had to settle for a less grand hotel, though admittedly it wasn't one of those pilgrim fleapits in the Old City. But for me, that's a sign of how far how far her superpower status has fallen in the dwindling days of Bushdom.

McGirk also notes that Condi's name is now being used as a verb on Israeli television, "meaning to go endlessly around in circles, accomplishing nothing."

As European leaders are trying to come to terms with Ireland's stunning rejection of the revised EU treaty, they would be wise to listen to Charlie McCreevy:

The treaty refers to sub-paragraphs of former sub- paragraphs and other documents and there is no person this side of Timbuktu who would be in a position to understand it,'' Ireland's representative on the EU commission, Charlie McCreevy, told reporters in Dublin. While McCreevy backs the treaty, he said he hasn't read it.

The irony here is that the new treaty would actually make the European Commission, often accused of being opaque and antidemocratic, more accountable, not less. A pity advocates weren't able to communicate that more effectively.

FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

With airfares continuing to skyrocket and all the bad news about airlines going bankrupt, there's actually one potential bright spot in the world of air travel: China and Taiwan are holding official talks about the possibility of charter flights across the Taiwan Strait. Led by Chiang Pin-kung (right), chairman of the quasi-governmental Straits Exchange Foundation, a 19-member delegation from Taiwan arrived in Beijing Wednesday for four days of discussions. Relations between the two sides have warmed considerably since Ma Ying-jeou, who favors closer ties with the mainland, was elected president of Taiwan in March.

This week's talks are the first time in nearly a decade that there have been formal negotiations between China and Taiwan. It's not Chiang's first visit to Beijing, though. Three years ago, I interviewed him in Taipei shortly after he returned from Beijing, where he was visiting as a member of Taiwan's Kuomintang (KMT) party (but not as an official from Taiwan's government -- a fine distinction that's all too important in delicate cross-Strait relations). His visit was frowned upon by then-President Chen Shui-bian, who was in favor of the island's independence. Chiang told me that his goal was to develop relations with the mainland in a way that would benefit Taiwan's economy, and not to get overly bogged down in politics. But now with a KMT president in office, he's free to engage in both politics and economics.

This week's talks will probably focus exclusively on economic ties, however. Polls show that Taiwanese prefer to maintain the status quo of de facto independence, but want the economic opportunities that closer ties with China will provide. And the Chinese are not about to do anything drastic politically -- not with all international eyes on them after the earthquake and ahead of the Olympics in August. So, for this round, just expect lots of handshakes, photo ops, and quite possibly, a little more friendliness in the skies.