The controversy over the invasion of Iraq damaged U.S. relations with some European countries, including France and Germany. But we can repair these relationships if the Bush administration is willing to compromise on some key issues after the war - like an eventual role for the United Nations in rebuilding Iraq and agreement on a multilateral initiative to settle the dispute between Israel and the Palestinians. We have already begun to see European leaders reaching out to the president in attempts to mend fences with the United States.

Q. What is next for Iraq now that the United States has officially declared that Saddam Hussein's regime has been overthrown?

A. There is no doubt that the United States and the coalition won the war, but at this writing, there are concerns about whether we can win the peace. The need for reconstruction of Iraq will be a tremendous burden that the United States cannot, and should not, shoulder alone in the 21st century. Iraq will be militarily occupied and governed by American leaders for a short period of time, but Secretary of State Colin Powell has pledged that we will then move quickly to establish a representative government in Iraq. This idealized model of transition to democracy in Iraq will not be easy to attain, however, and there is growing evidence that post-war Iraq will be plagued by tribal and sectional differences, economic instability, popular unrest, guerilla fighting, and threats along its borders. If Afghanistan represents a model for nation-building in Iraq, reconstruction will be plagued by difficulties.

Q. Did the U.S. invasion set a new precedent for unprovoked attacks on other countries?

A. The decision by the Bush administration to target Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime represents a fundamentally new direction for U.S. foreign policy in the post-Cold War era. The president has articulated a new doctrine of preemption and identified our enemies as terrorist networks, states who sponsor them, and states that seek weapons of mass destruction. But I wouldargue that a doctrine of preemption threatens 20th century statutes in international law, the United Nations Charter, and international norms of territorial sovereignty and non-intervention. To critics, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq represents an act of imperialism and demonstrates a new assertiveness in our foreign policy profile.

Q. What is next for United States foreign policy in the Middle East?

A. The Middle East is a complex region of the world, full of both challenges and opportunities. I hope that the next stage of U.S. foreign policy in the region actually will be a progressive step toward future peace and prosperity. The Bush administration has a unique opportunity to build on the success of the war in Iraq by launching a new round of peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. The United States could use its political capital in the region by pressuring both sides to reach some final settlement on Palestinian authority and statehood.

Furthermore, the Bush administration can use the example of the war in Iraq as diplomatic leverage to seek concessions from countries like Syria and Iran on such concerns as support for terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. There is a danger, however, that some conservatives in the Bush administration will instead see this as an opportunity for "saber-rattling" by pursuing a much more aggressive posture towards these countries.