Example collocations logo

Strategic in sentence

2937 examples of Strategic in a sentence

Now he is faced with a strategic nightmare come true: Iran’s possible integration into the international community without having to dismantle its nuclear-weapons potential.
For Iran, a strategic partnership with the US would be the ultimate betrayal of the Islamic revolution, an inconceivable change of identity.
One would expect that, with the rising Iranian threat fostering tacit security cooperation between Israel and its more stable Arab neighbors (particularly Saudi Arabia), Netanyahu would aspire to resolve the Palestinian issue, thus removing the last obstacle to an overt strategic partnership.
Someone clearly looks likely to fall into a strategic trap, but who?Listen to Me!SAN FRANCISCO – Last week, I wrote a 140-character hotel review on Twitter: “Galleria Park Hotel SF rejects noise complaint from ill-trained guest: ‘Next time, ask for an interior room, not just a quiet room.’”
But several factors heighten the current negotiations’ strategic importance.
Second, Iran’s regional standing has been shaken by the wave of Arab revolts, especially in Syria – a decisive country, given its strategic relations with both Iran and Russia.
So the state should have only a few firms in strategic sectors or in activities that are rife with market failures.
In Russia’s view – which is, probably, fanciful – such a shield could intercept its intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), thereby posing a strategic threat.
This demands less outright combat and more effective peacekeeping, through strategic decision-making, intelligence gathering, and civil engagement.
Although Baghdad's strategic significance was limited, the British government needed a success to restore its international prestige, badly damaged by the failure of the Gallipoli expedition.
Since then, China has built six more artificial islands in the South China Sea and steadily expanded its military assets in this highly strategic area, through which one-third of global maritime trade passes.
Consequently, China has turned its contrived historical claims to the South China Sea into reality and gained strategic depth, despite a 2016 ruling by an international arbitral tribunal invalidating those claims.
The US, however, regards Abe’s worries about Japan’s spirit as peripheral to its efforts to forge a lasting relationship with China and overhaul its strategic presence in the Pacific.
To achieve that goal, the Chilean state will need strategic partners, which may turn out to be foreign or domestic.
Chile’s traditional left, arguing that lithium is legally classified as a strategic resource, rules out any further private-sector involvement in its production.
South Korea’s liberals also recognize that the strategic situation has changed significantly since the Kim and early Roh eras, when North Korea had not yet become a de facto nuclear state.
Obama’s Underachieving Foreign PolicyPARIS – To evaluate an American president’s foreign-policy performance after one term is challenging, given the complex diplomatic and strategic environment and significant domestic constraints that confront every US president.
But the move proved to be a strategic defeat, given that it significantly diminished the United States’ political influence in Iraq.
Meanwhile, America’s strategic partnership with Pakistan, where Obama won a significant symbolic victory by eliminating Osama bin Laden, is in tatters.
In fact, in all of the strategic challenges to US security that Obama inherited – Iran, North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – he has made virtually no significant political gains.
Notwithstanding Obama’s skillful response to the Arab Spring – the only strategic surprise that he has faced as president – his credibility in the Muslim world has steadily declined.
Jettisoning the Manichean rhetoric of that “war” allowed the US to regain the political legitimacy that former President George W. Bush had lost, without diminishing its strategic credibility.
As a result, he has failed to change strategic realities by, for example, reconciling America’s broader interests with those of Iran (a declared enemy), Pakistan (a “frenemy”), and Israel (a key ally).
To be sure, Obama faces a more complex diplomatic and strategic environment than Nixon faced in the 1970’s.
The obvious lesson to be drawn from 1979 is that America unwisely rested its entire strategic relationship with Iran on the shoulders of an unpopular dictator.
Beyond that, Lugar had fully supported Obama’s vision, like that of Ronald Reagan before him, of a world without nuclear weapons, and his endorsement of the New START treaty with Russia, reducing the number of deployed strategic weapons, was crucial in securing its narrow ratification by the Senate last year.
Trump may reverse President Barack Obama’s strategic “pivot” toward Asia, leaving the region in chaos.
When, as president, he supported the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 or the coming invasion of Iraq in 2003, he did not talk about geo-political or strategic objectives but about the need to stop human-rights abuses by brutal dictators.
The growing dispute over trade sanctions brings to the fore not only the fundamental ethical question of whether wealthy nations should bear the burden of emissions reduction alone, but also the strategic question of whether sticks as well as carrots should be used to induce green behavior in developing countries.
The strategic emphasis on “breakout time” is thus misplaced.
BackNext