The Obama administration could abstain from a Security Council resolution affirming a Palestinian state, and we will soon see how hostile to Israel President Obama is prepared to be.

“President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus”—Okay, we get it. The Republican candidates must move beyond repeating that mantra.

Recognizing "statehood" does not mean U.N. membership, but it would nonetheless be a major Palestinian success. A resolution recognizing a Palestinian "state" could also declare its boundary to be the 1967 borders (in actuality, merely the 1949 armistice lines), with or without President Obama's caveat about "agreed upon swaps" of land.

The only practical result of the General Assembly declaring "Palestine" a state will be to move its chair on the side of the Assembly hall a few feet from its present location to be next to the Vatican, the only other "observer state." This is nothing to get excited about.

With slowing economic growth, a publicly feuding cabinet, and a series of corruption scandals that have paralyzed governance, you might think the last thing India needs is a foreign policy mishap. But there's no other way to characterize New Delhi's full-throated support for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas's dangerous grandstanding at the United Nations in pursuit of statehood.

Until the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the American view of radical Islam and its many discontents was shaped more by the Middle East than South Asia. The U.S. has long been at odds with the raging Ayatollah in Iran, the murderous truck bomber in Lebanon and the masked Palestinian "freedom...

The Palestinian Authority succeeded last Monday in becoming a member state in the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

It is no surprise that the Middle East, one of our most intractable problems, provokes so much U.N. activity, even though the real-world consequences are so limited.