Friday, January 2, 2009

Obama's Bi-Partisan Approach To Foreign Policy

TW: Obama appears to getting a fair amount of input from Brent Scowcroft, long-time Republican foreign policy advisor until W. Bush became POTUS and brushed him off. Foreign policy generally throughout American history had bi-partisan characterisitcs. Things evolved in a more partisan fashion after Vietnam but still maintained a more bi-partisan feel relative to economic and social policy, until W. Bush who let the neo-cons take over.

Obama's retention of Robert Gates as Sec Def, Jim Jones as Nat. Sec Advisor and work with Scowcroft provide a hopeful sign that Obama will restore bi-partisanship what should be the least partisan area of American governance.

From Joe Klein at Time:
"...Scowcroft's brand of low-key "realism" was derided as milquetoasty by the neocons...There were two signal moments during Scowcroft's tour as Bush the Elder's National Security Adviser that seem relevant to the job ahead for Obama. One was the patient construction of a vast international alliance to oppose Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait--the alliance Bush the Younger was unable to construct when he invaded Iraq. The other moment, perhaps more significant in retrospect, occurred when Scowcroft and his boss agreed that it wouldn't be prudent for the President to go to Berlin to celebrate the fall of the wall in 1989. Didn't want them to feel "we were sticking our thumb in their eye," Bush the Elder allegedly said of the Russians, a strategy that proved essential to the quiet reunification of Germany...

Nuance, negotiation, alliances, diplomacy--and the use of force only in concert with others or when U.S. interests are directly threatened--are back...

In an example that has immediate relevance, both stand their ground in favor of a more balanced policy in the Middle East--balance is a loaded word, a euphemism, neocons complain, for making demands on Israel. Scowcroft says we have a "natural"--not a "special"--relationship with Israel, a "small, courageous democracy in a hostile land," but also an "equal commitment" to ease Palestinian suffering. Both sides need a "heavier hand by the United States than we have traditionally practiced."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1869221-1,00.html

No comments: