Here is a strong example from Walter Russell Mead of elegant but tough foreign policy writing, this time on the increasingly dysunctional US/Pakistan relationship.

Once upon a time India with its phony anti-Americanist ‘non-alignment’ as encouraged by massive Soviet penetration of the Indian establishment was the main reason for Washington to treat Pakistan as a reasonable partner.

No longer. India is a confident and fast-growing international economic force, much less impressed by Moscow’s puny blandishments. And Pakistan is decaying and declining, for all the familiar reasons.

So read this analysis which combines facts, arguments, attitudes and interests in a highly persuasive way:

On the evidence of Abbottabad, few Chinese foreign policy analysts will propose trusting Pakistan.  Nice words, candy and flowers on its birthday, but little else…

Defeat after defeat by India, progressive deterioration of the domestic security climate and the utter collapse of political morality in what passes for the governing class in Pakistan have not forced a reevaluation.  Charm and appeals to sweet reason by American officials and emissaries won’t do it either. 

Neither will humanitarian aid: the suffering of ordinary Pakistanis has little impact on the elite, and in the short to medium term public opinion in Pakistan is so anti-American and so politically marginal that we could die of old age waiting for spending however generous to change our image in Pakistan enough to change the politics of the relationship…

The article also helpfully introduces us lesser English-speakers to a new word, ‘bromance‘ ("slang for an unusually strong nonsexual relationship between two straight males or a romantic relationship between two gay males" – see the exchanges in the comments).