In a speech to the Israeli Knesset yesterday, President Bush touched off a small political controversy back home when he said:

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is--the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. "

Was this a reference to Senator Barack Obama's statements that America should seek dialogue with enemies? Obama thought so. And so did Senator Hillary Clinton.

Obama said, "Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power--including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy--to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists."

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, "We have a protocol, sort of a custom, informally around here that we don't criticize the president when he is on foreign soil. One would think that that would apply to the president that he would not criticize Americans when he is on foreign soil."

More

• Reaction to Bush "appeasement" remark, from Reuters
• Dems fire back at Bush on 'appeasement' statement, from CNN
• Obama clashes with Bush in Nazi appeasement, from The Times of London
• McCain Agrees With Bush’s Remarks on Appeasement, The Caucus Blog from The New York Times

UPDATE: A White House spokesperson implies President Bush's remarks about appeasement were aimed at Nobel Peace Prize winner, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter.

Does anyone remember the old Anne Murray song, Sure Could Use a Little Good News Today? It starts out:

"I rolled out this morning
Kids had the mornin' news show on
Bryant Gumbel was talkin' 'bout the fighting in Lebanon."

That was 1983. Bryant Gumbel is long gone from morning television, but Lebanon is still in turmoil. Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that Lebanon is doomed to perpetual violence, and we should therefore write it off as hopeless. Lebanon is a wonderful place with vibrant people, and I truly believe peace can be won. But it is certainly a long hard slog.

I cannot comprehend the pain and suffering the citizens of Beirut have gone through over these decades. And now the violence is on the upswing again.

Sorting out the players is always difficult, and I cannot claim to have mastery over it. But there are some trusted and credible places I turn on the Web for insights:

Violence Resumes in Tripoli, Beirutt
A short report from The Media Line.

Abu Aardvark
Marc Lynch is a professor of political science at George Washington University, and his blog consistently offers original insights into the Middle East. In a post titled, "Lebanon's crisis not really a Sunni-Shia crisis (unless it is)," he sheds a lot of light on the conflict.

Michael Young
Young is the opinion page editor of the Daily Star in Beirut. In this interview with the Council on Foreign Relations, he explains the strategy of Hezbollah in Lebanon and how the current crisis may play out.

The Beirut Report
Media expert and Beirut reporter Habib Battah began this new blog just in time to cover the current crisis. He has focused on how the television stations in Beirut are being used (and sometimes captured) as part of the larger propaganda battle being waged in Lebanon. The screen shots he has from the popular Future TV being taken over by a militia group are eerie.

On The Face
This blog is maintained by intrepid Israeli journalist Lisa Goldman. She recently posted "Israeli media coverage of Lebanon’s latest crisis" to give us some idea of how Israeli's are seeing and interpreting what is happening to their neighbor.

The Washington Note
The Washington Note has gathered a number of resources for analyzing the situation in a post titled, "Ground Reports from Lebanon."

Foreign Policy and Prospect magazines are trying to determine who are the top public intellectuals in the world. And they want your help in the process. Describing the contest they say:

"They are some of the world’s most introspective philosophers and rabble-rousing clerics. A few write searing works of fiction and uncover the mysteries of the human mind. Others are at the forefront of modern finance, politics, and human rights. In the second Foreign Policy/Prospect list of top public intellectuals, we reveal the thinkers who are shaping the tenor of our time."

Here they have listed and described the 100 finalists. The names include prominent parts of the U.S. foreign policy establishment, such as Samuel Huntington, Robert Kagan, Thomas Friedman, David Petraeus, Francis Fukuyama, Samantha Power, Fareed Zakaria, and more.

The site offers readers the chance to vote for their five favorites. I chose Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi of Iran, Pulitzer Prize winner Samantha Power of the United States, The Post-American World author Fareed Zakaria of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammed Yunus of Bangladesh, and economist Jeffrey Sachs of the United States.

Voting ends on May 15.

A new report, poll, map, book club discussion, and more are among the very good things I have found across the Web in recent days. Check them out:

Confidence in U.S. Foreign Policy Index
Every six months, Public Agenda releases poll results on American views of foreign policy. Economy and energy are the new top two concerns. And 84 percent are worried about how things are going for the United States in world affairs.

New Report on Terrorism
The U.S. State Department just released its annual country-by-country report on terrorist threats and activities.

A Diplomat's View on Engaging Iran
Former Ambassador Thomas Pickering has held several unofficial meetings with Iranians over the years. Late last month, Pickering spoke with NPR's Scott Simon where he speculated on how official U.S.-Iranian talks could happen.

TPM Book Club: Heads in the Sand
Experts at the TPM Book Club are discussing the new book by Matthew Yglesias, "Heads in the Sand: How the Republicans Screw Up Foreign Policy and Foreign Policy Screws Up the Democrats"

The World According to the Editors
Foreign Policy Passport found these maps where the countries are sized according to the number of headlines they generate in select media outlets.

Facts About NAFTA
About Guide to US Economy Kimberly Amadeo has collected a number of great resources on the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Best Foreign Policy Blogs
The blogosphere is full of great resources on U.S. foreign policy. Some of it is analysis, some is opinion, and some is on-the-ground reporting. Here are the ones I check nearly every day.

As we hurtle closer to November 4, 2008, I am ready to start speculating about who will succeed Condoleezza Rice at the State Department. I've created a list of potential nominees for each of the remaining presidential candidates. And yes, there is some overlap in the lists. A President Barack Obama might need to reach out to a Clinton adviser. And there are a handful of foreign policy gurus which could cross party lines and serve either a Democrat or a President John McCain.

So what do you think? Review the names and make your prediction here.

From the Council on Foreign Relations to Congress and from the Brookings Institution to the United Nations, there are a number of institutions important to the creation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy.

• American Enterprise Institute
• Brookings Institution
• Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
• Center for American Progress
• Citizens Groups
• Congress
• Council on Foreign Relations
• Defense Department
• Executive Branch
• Heritage Foundation
• NATO
• RAND Corporation
• State and Local Governments
• State Department
• Think Tanks and NGOs
• United Nations
• United Nations Security Council

During the Cold War, the global situation was described as "bipolar." Almost all nations aligned themselves with either the United States or the Soviet Union. There was a "non-aligned movement" led by India. But even their name reinforced the reality that there were only two real powers in the world.

After the USSR collapsed, international affairs experts began talking about a "unipolar" world. This was a rare moment when one country, in this case the United States, strode the world as an unchallenged power. But the unipolar moment did not last long.

Other countries and groups of countries challenge the United States on a range of issues and sometimes get their way. The European Union offers the Euro as a serious alternative to the U.S. dollar for global investment. China flexes its trade muscle with American allies in the developing world. The Middle East controls much of the U.S. energy supply, and so on. No one country can counter the United States across the board, but the slow aggregation of these challenges led foreign policy wonks to begin talking about a "multipolar" world.

In fact, "multipolar" has been a buzz world in policy circles just long enough that it is about time for someone to offer up a new word and a new way of describing the current world. To do so, along comes Richard Haass.

Ambassador Haass is former Bush Administration official and author who now heads the Council on Foreign Relations. In a new article for Foreign Affairs and in a column for the Financial Times, Haas describes a world of "nonpolarity."

Haass acknowledges the rise of some other big powers (like China, the European Union, India, Japan, and Russia), but he adds:

"Today's world differs in a fundamental way from one of classic multipolarity: there are many more power centers, and quite a few of these poles are not nation-states. Indeed, one of the cardinal features of the contemporary international system is that nation-states have lost their monopoly on power and in some domains their preeminence as well. States are being challenged from above, by regional and global organizations; from below, by militias; and from the side, by a variety of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and corporations. Power is now found in many hands and in many places."

Haas says this new world offers many challenges and dangers for the United States. But I am glad he also focuses on changes we can make now to reap the benefits a nonpolar world offers.

• The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance from Foreign Affairs
• What Follows American Dominion? from Financial Times
• After the Unipolar Moment: Reconciling the U.S. and the World, from the Stanley Foundation
• The New Consensus — A Multipolar World, from the International Herald Tribune

One of the best parts of being an About.com guide is knowing that across the network, other guides are digging up great resources and analysis on my topic. Here are three recent examples of great guide content on U.S. foreign policy:

• Should Jimmy Carter Meet With Hamas? asks About Guide to Middle East Issues Pierre Tristam
• Bush on Global Warming: Decider or Dissembler? asks About Guide to Environmental Issues Larry West
• If the Dollar Collapses Will Americans Emigrate en Masse? asks About Guide to U.S. Economy Kimberly Amadeo
• Speaker Pelosi Was Right to Block Colombia Free Trade Pact says About Guide to U.S. Liberal Politics Deborah White
• Don Eberly and the Case for a Global Civil Society from About Guide to U.S. Conservative Politics Justin Quinn

From Madeleine Albright to Zalmay Khalilzad, all kinds of interesting people inside the United States and out have an impact on U.S. foreign policy. The list includes ambassadors, secretaries of state, special envoys, senators, and other top brass and big wigs.

Here are my profiles of Albright, Khalilzad, James Baker, Ban Ki Moon, Henry Kissinger, David Petraeus, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and many more.

The blogosphere is full of great resources on U.S. foreign policy. Some of it is analysis, some is opinion, and some is on-the-ground reporting. Here are the ones I check nearly every day:

• Foreign Policy Passport. This blog is run by the editors of Foreign Policy magazine. The daily "Morning Briefing" full of foreign policy related links is priceless.
• The Washington Note. Steve Clemons of the New America Foundation runs this personal blog. Mixed in with great analysis of current events is high-quality, well-informed speculation about behind-the-scenes maneuvering in Washington, DC's foreign policy machine. And it has a new design!

See the full list.