The following are editorial opinions from newspapers from around the world which may be of interest to Royal Gazette readers.

The Ottawa (Ontario) Sun –on Canada's defence of Israel

If Prime Minister Stephen Harper had the oratorical style of a Barack Obama, the nuanced elegance of a Pierre Trudeau, or the fire of a John Diefenbaker, his speech recently on anti-Semitism and Israel would be put on a pedestal.

It was blunt, it was courageous, and it stood tall and unflinching in its condemnation of the "new anti-Semitism" now sweeping the world, as well as the growing hatred of Israel as it rightfully fights for its continued survival.

All Harper's speech lacked — and remember, it was vitally important because it was addressed to 150 parliamentarians from 50 countries seeking answers to quell such hatred against both Jews and Israel — was the delivery of a master of the podium.

His words, however, were masterful words, and Canadians should be proud of their PM. ...

As we stated following Canada's rejection by the UN for a seat on the security council — losing out to debt-plagued Portugal, no less — if it was Canada's unwavering support of Israel that led to its first loss of a such a seat since the UN formed in 1945, then it should wear that loss with immense pride. ...

It would be all too easy to take a leave of absence in the face of anti-Semitism, and to feign some sort of blinkered neutrality.

But Harper was precise about our moral obligations, stating that whenever anti-Semitism raises its head Canada will take a stand against it, and then stand tall in defending Israel's right to exist. ...

People's Daily, Beijing, –on US "smart power" foreign policy

The US economy has been struggling in the past few years. Yet, the concept of "smart power" promoted by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been playing an active role in the country's foreign relations, creating tangible heat, especially in Asia.

Old disputes between China and Japan over the Diaoyu Islands broke out again recently and has evolved into a major crisis. Hanoi suddenly became a centre where Southeast Asian countries challenged China's role in the South China Sea.

These are not simply quarrels between China and Japan or Southeast Asia. The US plays a major part.

It was Clinton who openly questioned China's South China Sea policy. The US also backed Japan after the collision crisis by stating that the US-Japanese security treaty applies to the Diaoyu Islands.

In the years after the end of the Cold War, the US could police the world simply with its "hard power," as was shown by its war in Iraq and its involvement in Yugoslavia. Yet the US has been faced with increasing difficulty in pushing forward with its tough policies around the world.

Clinton has a complicated interpretation of the "smart power" theory. She uses a handful of tools such as diplomacy, economics, military, and politics, as well as legal, and cultural tools.

In Asia, however, US foreign policy basically encourages disagreements among Asian countries, especially by rallying Asian countries against China. The US then collects the fruit.

It is sad that a couple of smart power tricks are shaking the vulnerable stability in the western Pacific. ...

As the major target of US smart power, China has to be on guard. It will not only watch to prevent the US from messing up Asia, but also prevent the US from sticking its hands into China.

The Jerusalem Post –on Iranian 'containment'

In his speech before the General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America in New Orleans, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu focused on Iran. "Containment will not work," Netanyahu warned, and he called to move beyond sanctions to mounting a "credible military threat" against the Islamic Republic.

Netanyahu's comments, coming less than a week after US midterm elections handed a major victory to Republicans, highlighted the growing daylight between Israel and the Republicans on one side, and the Democrats on the other, over Iran's nuclear program.

While there is bipartisan support for "crippling sanctions," and while Israel is emphatically publicly supportive of the sanctions effort, the sides are split over the fallback position in the event sanctions don't work. ...

"Containment" is a term borrowed from the Cold War era when the US in the mid-1960s refrained from attacking China's nuclear plants to prevent Mao from getting the bomb. In the Iranian context, containment implies that since it is impossible to stop Iran from attaining nuclear capability, all efforts should now be focused on deterring Iran from using it and preventing nuclear proliferation. ...

With Israel on the front lines as a country that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said should be "wiped off the map," a failed containment policy is an existential threat. ...

But what happens if these sanctions are exhausted and the Islamic Republic remains undeterred in its hell-bent push for nuclear capability? For Israel, many in the Republican party and some Democrats, and the majority of Americans and French, the answer is clear. The more credible a military threat today, the greater the chance that a resort to force may not prove necessary.

The Dallas Morning News –on Karzai and the Afghan mission

Once again, an ill-considered statement by Afghanistan's mercurial president, Hamid Karzai, has cast a shadow over the US-led military mission. Karzai raised doubts in an interview about why foreign troops are necessary and suggested it's time to curtail Nato operations and start withdrawing.

The blowback was swift. Gen. David Petraeus, the coalition military commander, warned that Karzai's criticism makes the general's job "untenable." A scheduled meeting between the two was cancelled.

In an interview with The Washington Post, Karzai described relations between the US and Afghanistan as "grudging" and expressed deep scepticism about American policy. From his perspective, these might not be verbal blunders but rather a candid expression of his true feelings. That's exactly the problem.

Respected world leaders rarely speak their minds publicly. Statesmen understand the importance of measuring their words carefully to avoid creating the tensions that Karzai regularly stirs. Few countries have such a high dependence on international military assistance as Afghanistan. When speaking publicly, Karzai must place his country's broader security interests ahead of his personal desire to vent. ...

President Barack Obama shares the blame with his flip-flopping on Afghanistan policy, particularly regarding the date to begin US withdrawal. ...

Karzai needs to learn the art of keeping his mouth shut. Obama needs to articulate a clear and unambiguous policy that doesn't give Karzai justification for continued outbursts. ...

Policy ambiguities aside, the current US strategy is showing positive results. Karzai's antics must not be allowed to derail America's mission.

Los Angeles Times –on tuition rates for illegal immigrants

In a decision that could have ramifications for higher education across the country, the California Supreme Court ruled that illegal immigrants who attend state high schools for at least three years and graduate can continue to pay the lower, instate tuition rates at California's public universities and colleges. The decision, which reverses a lower-court ruling, is a huge victory for many deserving students who otherwise might have been unable to afford a college education

Under federal law, states must provide a free K-12 education to illegal immigrants, which, by some estimates, costs California close to $3 billion. We agree that this is a moral imperative. But we also wonder what the sense would have been in investing heavily in thousands of students, inspiring them to excel, and then putting higher education out of their financial reach. ...

California is one of 10 states that provide instate tuition to illegal immigrants, an indication of the extent to which states, in the absence of guidance from Congress, have moved to address the educational, economic and social needs of the immigrant populations within their borders. ...

It is true that federal law prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving college benefits based on residency. California's law, however, is based not on residency but on whether the student attended and graduated from a high school in the state. ... Two similar lawsuits are pending in Texas and Nebraska.

The decision is only a step in the right direction. Both supporters and opponents note that there is an inescapable conflict brought up by the law: Once armed with college degrees, these students cannot be legally employed. Congress can and should correct this by passing the DREAM Act, which would set students who meet certain postsecondary requirements on a path to citizenship. California recognises the importance of these young immigrants to our future, and the nation should too.

The Seattle Times –on federal interest in online security

Anyone venturing into the Internet knows their online life is an open book. Forgive the mixed metaphor, but the knowledge virtually every keystroke is being monitored is both understood and wearing thin.

The Obama administration's interest in online privacy is welcome and timely. New laws backed up with serious oversight and enforcement should boost user confidence they have some control over the personal information they send into the ether. ...

Laws that empower consumers with options and rights are desirable, but anyone surfing the Web could confidently bet their mother's maiden name that change will be slow in coming. ...

The Obama administration is considering tougher rules and regulations that revive and empower the current watchdog role of the Federal Trade Commission. Incoming Republican committee leadership professes to like the idea of protecting consumers, but not enhancing enforcement powers.

Industry giants central to the discussion have organised themselves as the Digital Due Process coalition and, as CNET first reported last spring, released their own plans for privacy reforms. Coalition members include Google, eBay, Microsoft, AT&T, the ACLU and Americans for Tax Reform. ...

They argue significant protections already exist, the industry can do it better than regulators, and that true online privacy means pushing back on the government's ability to evade protections and listen and watch as it sees fit. ...

Rules are desirable, and they work best when they are clearly defined and enforced. Those are fundamental operating guidelines for the administration.