The foreign policy offered by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is bold, idealistic, muscular, expansive and Kennedy-esque.
It also is, as his Democratic rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York) charges, naive and irresponsible. It sounds like the vision of a freshman senator. Or, possibly, a Texas governor with no foreign policy experience.
Obama promises that, as president, he will do it all — visit on an unconditional basis with five of the world’s worst dictators in his first year; get out of Iraq and fight harder in Afghanistan and, maybe, Pakistan; rebuild old U.S. alliances and establish new ones; double U.S. foreign aid; and improve U.S. intelligence-gathering while abandoning nasty means like warrantless wiretapping.
He will “not hesitate to use force, unilaterally if necessary, to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened.” And he also would use force “beyond self-defense ... to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations or confront mass atrocities.”
And that’s not all. He also will get control of the world’s loose nukes; reach out to the Muslim world in his first 100 days; close down Guantanamo Bay and give full constitutional rights to enemy combatants; rally the world to address global climate change; and kill and capture terrorists anywhere on the globe, but never kidnap or torture any of them.
Of course, it’s perfectly legitimate for a presidential candidate to lay down a broad foreign policy vision, as Obama did in his terrorism speech Wednesday and in a Foreign Affairs article earlier this year.
But completely missing from Obama’s breathtaking agenda is any sense of priorities, limits, difficulties — or humility. His pronouncements exude hubris and inexperience.
Obama cannot speak or write without excoriating President Bush. His deepest dig on Wednesday was “because of a war in Iraq that should never have been authorized and should never have been waged, we are now less safe than we were before 9/11.”
Besides being untrue — most Americans hardly knew there was an Al Qaeda threat before Sept. 11, 2001 — his unremitting criticism of Bush will make it difficult for Obama to do what he says he wants to: reunite the nation behind difficult common purposes.
He accused Clinton, in their testy exchanges after the July 24 CNN/YouTube debate, of pursuing a foreign policy that is “Bush lite.” In fact, it’s Obama who most recalls Bush, notably his overambitious, we-can-implant-democracy-anywhere 2004 inaugural address.
Clinton, by contrast, conveyed a sense — well-earned — of having been around the Oval Office when hard choices had to be made. She had to know from her husband’s bitter experience convening a last-ditch Mideast summit at Camp David in 2000 that it’s dangerous for a president to undertake personal diplomacy “without preconditions.”
Any Democratic president — and any smart Republican, too — will abandon Bush’s first-term policy of non-negotiation with adversaries. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in fact, has abandoned it already.
But Obama seems to think it would be useful to, as he said, “sit down with” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and “send a strong message that Israel is our friend, that we will assist in their security and that we won’t find nuclear weapons acceptable.”
That intention recalls President John F. Kennedy’s 1961 effort in Vienna to convince Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev that capitalism was superior to communism, which resulted in a summit disaster, an intensified Cold War and, perhaps, the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Obama and his advisers argue that President Ronald Reagan met with Mikhail Gorbachev despite calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” But Reagan’s first summit was in 1985, nearly five years after he took office and after he had acquired the leverage of the Star Wars program and Pershing II missiles in Europe.
The good news in Obama’s terrorism speech was that he actually shares Bush’s sense of the menace presented by global terrorism. “Just because the president misrepresents our enemies does not mean that we don’t have them,” he said, and promised to “wage the war that has to be won.”
There are many attractive ideas in Obama’s agenda, including a new language-savvy America’s Voice Corps to work in the Muslim world and programs to fight poverty and ignorance. Obama wants America to be “the relentless opponent of terror and tyranny, and the light of hope to the world.”
It all echoes John F. Kennedy — who, in 1961, said, “we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe” — and Obama clearly means to be the torchbearer for a new generation. But America also needs a president with the experience to avoid a Bay of Pigs, a Vietnam or an Iraq War.
Morton Kondracke is executive editor of Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill.
Columns
Obama’s foreign vision is exciting — and also naive
- Columns
-
-
Slowly but Surely
How was your Super Bowl Weekend? Mallorie and I had a full schedule as we attended the “Krewe of Docs” hosted by Oncologics to benefit the American Cancer Society Saturday night. The event was held here in Downtown Laurel and everyone did a great job. The Cowboy Blues Band played the night away and fun was had by all. We got geared up again Sunday night for Super Bowl festivities. After our Saints fell short against the 49ers, I was less than excited about this year’s big game. I picked a favorite anyway and my allegiance fell on the shoulders of Eli and the Giants. It was a great game to watch as a football fan and as always the commercials were pretty great too.
-
Economic Chaos Ahead
Let’s think about the kind of mess that we’re in. Federal 2010 Medicare and Medicaid expenditures totaled $800 billion. The projected annual growth of both programs is about 7 percent. Social Security expenditures are more than $700 billion a year. According to the 2009 Social Security and Medicare trustees reports, by 2030, 49 percent of federal revenues will go for Social Security and Medicare payments. The unfunded liability of both programs is already $106 trillion.
-
Are people really retiring later?
True or false? You may have heard this claim before (or something like it): “Many Americans are being forced to retire later because their savings and investments took a hit in the Great Recession.”
-
Dead Mice Tell No Tales
“What’s that smell?” Sue asked from the front hall. “Is that a dead mouse?”
Sometimes I cannot help myself. “Is it?” I said. “I just thought you were cooking dinner.” Some people cannot take a joke. My shoulder still hurts. -
Around It or Through It
Recently, I had an irritation and wanted to go around it, but that is not how the story goes. I had a huge ulcer in my cheek; I was miserable and asked a doctor to help my pain. Instead of giving me a cure, He told me that I would be fine in a couple of weeks. That was not what I wanted to hear; I was in pain and a couple of weeks sounded like an eternity!
-
Northeast Jones grads doing well in sports world
Justin Cooley was approved Monday night by the Smith County school board as the new head football coach at Raleigh High School.
-
Health Care Trust Fund headed to a zero balance
A new Republican governor and new Republican legislative leadership now face the same task that has confounded their Democratic colleagues when they had the reins of state government – finding a way to pay for Mississippi’s massive Medicaid program.
-
Running as a businessman could be Romney’s curse
Mitt Romney has based nearly his entire presidential campaign on his experience as a businessman. “I spent my career in the private sector,” Romney told Fox News in late November. “I think that’s what the country needs right now.”
-
Reducing state teen pregnancy
In his State of the State address, Gov. Phil Bryant set out as a policy for his administration to tackle the issue of teen pregnancy — a formidable goal.
-
Sexes’ Differences Good for Valentine’s Day
Get this: men and women are different.
Italian researchers made this “groundbreaking” discovery in a recent study. - More Columns Headlines
-







