Policy in a nutshell

“Published on Thursday, July 29, 2004 by the Inter Press Service
Hegemony Yes, Empire No in a Kerry Foreign Policy
by Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON - If one were to reduce U.S. foreign policy under John Kerry -- should he defeat President George W Bush in the November elections -- to a four-word motto, it would probably be, ''Hegemony Yes, Empire No''.

A review of Kerry's positions over his career and presidential campaign strongly suggests the senator would try to take U.S. policy back to the basic ''realism'' of both former president Bill Clinton and his predecessor George HW Bush (the current president's father), who believed that in order to retain its international dominance Washington must take the interests of other nations, especially its allies, into account to the greatest extent possible before shaking up the global order.

That preference for multilateralism, which is bolstered by the host of former senior Clinton officials and retired diplomats who surround Kerry, has been a constant throughout the campaign.

''We must work with the international community to define a global strategy (against terrorism) that is collective and not imperial'', he told the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) last December in his most important foreign-policy address.

At the same time, Kerry, who voted -- with reservations -- for the congressional resolution to authorize war against Iraq, also shares with Bush Sr and Clinton the view that, while multilateralism is always preferable, the United States may act unilaterally if its vital interests are under serious and imminent threat.

''As president, I will not cede our security to any nation or institution'', he said recently. ''And adversaries will have no doubt of my resolve to use force if necessary''.

Whether these views would translate into major differences with Bush in substance -- and not just in style -- has become a source of endless debate among policy analysts.

Besides, even if the differences really are substantive, many observers wonder whether Kerry, if elected, could translate them into real policy, particularly if Bush's Republicans retain control of Congress. Clinton, after all, had promised an ''assertive multilateralism'' when he took office in 1992, only to be almost completely stymied after the 1994 elections that swept the Republicans to victory in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

Nonetheless, there appears little doubt that Kerry himself is genuinely angry about what he believes the past three years -- and particularly the war in Iraq -- have done to U.S. power and standing in the world. ''Simply put'', he told the staid CFR, a bastion of the foreign-policy establishment, ”the Bush administration has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless and ideological foreign policy in modern history''.

According to recent biographical accounts, Kerry's aversion to U.S. arrogance is quite genuine. When Clinton officials, for example, began referring to the United States as ''the indispensable nation'', Kerry reportedly complained to a veteran foreign policy aide, ''Why are we adopting such an arrogant, obnoxious tone''?

That sensitivity may be based in part on his unusually cosmopolitan upbringing and background, not to mention his marriage of 10 years to Theresa Heinz Kerry, the outspoken Mozambique-born, South African-educated, multilingual billionaire, who wowed the Democratic convention Tuesday night.

As noted in a recent article by 'The New Republic's' Franklin Foer, Kerry's father Richard, who died in 2000, was a career diplomat whose 1990 book 'Star-Spangled Mirror' strongly denounced moralism in U.S. foreign policy and the propensity of the public to ''see the world and foreign affairs in black and white''.

Kerry, who as a boy attended schools in Europe where his diplomat dad was posted, loved to talk about foreign policy with his father. According to Douglas Brinkley, a highly regarded historian and recent biographer of the candidate, the senator's basic ''foreign policy worldview comes straight from Richard Kerry''.

The challenger recently told the 'Washington Post' his father taught him ''the benefit of learning how to look at other countries and their problems and hopes and challenges through their eyes ... we don't always do that well''.

If anything, that worldview was reinforced by his experience in the Vietnam War, where he served as a highly decorated combat officer on Navy ''swift boats'' in the Mekong River. He returned to the United States as an outspoken and particularly articulate leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), although, with eye already fixed on a political career, he was careful not to associate himself with its more radical positions.

Once elected to the Senate, Kerry, along with former prisoner-of-war, Republican John McCain, took the lead in promoting reconciliation with Vietnam, an effort that offered few political rewards.

In Kerry's view, the Bush administration, particularly after the Sep. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon, has taken U.S. foreign policy in a radical new direction that threatens to destroy the post-World War II alliances that gave Washington, as the first among equals, far greater influence than it could ever deploy on its own.

Thus, his main foreign-policy goal will be to restore those alliances to the greatest extent possible, beginning with what Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld derisively called ''old Europe'' within the NATO alliance if, for no other reason, than to try to get more help in extracting U.S. troops from Iraq without leaving a ''failed state'' in their wake.

At the same time, Kerry will likely move quickly to try to defuse other burgeoning crises -- notably over North Korea and Iran -- where the current administration's stubborn refusal to deal directly with the charter members of what Bush called the ''axis of evil' has not only permitted them to advance nuclear-weapons programs, but also contributed to the alienation of Washington's closest allies, both in Europe and East Asia.

On a third front, Kerry has said he will make a series of gestures towards the larger international community, particularly the United Nations, to demonstrate that Washington will once again pursue a more multilateral approach.

Among those moves, he will almost certainly bring the United States back to the bargaining table over the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the Biological Weapons Convention; sharply cut programs for developing a national missile defense (NMD) system and eliminate funding for new nuclear weapons; commit substantially more money to the multilateral Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria and restore U.S. contributions to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA); and abruptly halt Washington's effort to undermine the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Soon after taking office, Kerry said in his CFR address, he would ''go to the United Nations and travel to our traditional allies to affirm that the United States has rejoined the community of nations''. He also promised to convene an early summit of U.S. allies ''to discuss a common anti-terrorism agenda, including a collective security framework, and a long-term strategy to build bridges to the Islamic world''.

Whether such an agenda is achievable depends heavily on what kind of a mandate Kerry wins in November, and particularly whether Democrats can win back a majority in at least one house of Congress. But it will also depend on how willing the international community, and particularly traditional U.S. allies, will be to help extract the United States from its current isolation -- beginning in Iraq.


© Copyright 2004 IPS - Inter Press Service”

“Ah crap!

We just got done covering foreign policy in Poli Sci today, which is my last instructional day. Prof sez that no matter what, a during the first 4-6 months of a Presidents first year, their foriengn policy is crap, then it *supposed* to get better after that. I put *supposed* an astrisks, because IMHO, Bush II is still in that 4-6 months philosophy. I don't know IF the world likes our policy when it comes to this issue. The "my way or the highway" crappola is a little tough for our worldly friends.

Speaking of, please tell us of your conversations re: Amercia and Bush II while over in Old Europe, Phad.”

“Well, one thing I did bring up when some of my In-law's friends were over is that there is a contingent of people in the US who believe we were attacked in the first place because we have shown too weak a foreign policy in the past.

This was greeted with the blank stares Mutt likes to brag about. In the end, though, they correctly identified the group:

"ohhh, you mean the Neocons?"

In short, my conversations were pleasant examples of the civility of political discussion in a country that still has guest commentators on the six o'clock news (you remember this - we had them in the seventies, when they would come on and talk civilly about some local event or proposal, and the next day someone with an opposing view would be invited).

I found most Germans to be better educated of the facts of international politics than most Americans. Also, talking about politics is not verboten, the way it seems to be in the states. Of course, with the level of discourse (AKA namecalling) we have here tday, it's no wonder people don't want to talk about it around the dinner table!”

“Thanks for the info.

My brother in law is Estonian and it is always a very refreshing feel wen we converse about this subject.

The Jerry Springer mentality in the States is an anchor around all of our necks.”

“In short, my conversations were pleasant examples of the civility of political discussion in a country that still has guest commentators on the six o'clock news (you remember this - we had them in the seventies, when they would come on and talk civilly about some local event or proposal, and the next day someone with an opposing view would be invited).
Phaedrus
05:33:21 PM
07/29/04

Now that's a fascinating tidbit! WTH happened to that?”

“Bear, it's not sensational enough for the American market any more.”

“Too bad. I remember seeing a PBS show on the censoring of E. Timor and Chomsky. The most memorable bit was when Mcneil & Leher (sp) cut him off, went to commercial and ended the interview.

Nice of PBS to include that, no?”

“I read a book on the way over that Chomsky wrote with Edward S. Herman. It's called Manufacturing Consent, and is one of the best thought-out books on the media I've ever read. I didn't agree one-hundred percent with the conclusions, but there was a lot of room for thought, and they certainly did their homework.

They use east timor as a case study in it.”

“Thank you!

I've been trying to recall the name of the documentary since I saw it and that's it:

Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky & Edward S. Herman!

It expands on the book, apparently. I'll look for both now.”

“Yeah, I'll have to look for the documentary! I didn't even know they had made it. Cool!”

“The documentary was produced & directed by Mark Achbar and Peter Wintonick. From all the reviews i can find they don't focus on Chomsky but instead on his views and ideas.

They have some footage of Chomsky vs. Buckley in 1969 "Firing Line" and a discussion with philosopher Michel Foucault.


"cast" also includes
Peter Jennings
Bill Moyers
Tom Wolfe

OK. I might be getting to excited by this.”

“Welcome back loser.”

“I'm going to go out and get "Sore Winners".


It address what where talking about here and is supposed to be fantastic.”

“Anyone want to discuss the actual policies?”

“Which one/s?”

“Foucault (not pronounced F---o) is a very interesting guy, even if he is impenetrable (at least to me) sometimes and wrongo at others.”

“Okay. Pedxing lost me.”

“It was always part of our foreign policy, or so I thought, that we neve negotiate with terrorists.

So then what is Powell during talking to the terrorists in order to secure the release of foriegn hostages for?

Does this go against our policy?

story -

Talks under way to free Iraq hostages

Saturday, July 31, 2004 Posted: 9:08 AM EDT (1308 GMT)


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Talks have begun between representatives of kidnappers and a Kuwaiti trucking company in an effort to free seven truck drivers being held hostage.

A group calling itself the Islamic Secret Army Black Banners Brigades said it is holding hostage three Indians, three Kenyans and an Egyptian who work for the Kuwait and Gulf Link Transport Company (KGL).

A source close to the talks said Mehdi Saleh presented a letter from KGL stating he was its representative to Sheikh Hisham al-Dulemi, who claimed he represented the kidnappers.

The talks began at about 1:30 p.m. Saturday, according to Moqdam Hamid, a spokesman for al-Dulemi.

The two men had previously spoken via telephone, but al-Dulemi wanted a face-to-face meeting to make sure Saleh was indeed representing KGL, Hamid said.

Indian foreign ministry officials said their government has dispatched India's ambassador to Oman, Talmiz Ahmad, to Baghdad in an effort to negotiate the release of the three Indian drivers.

On Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell made a surprise visit to Baghdad and acknowledged that the recent rash of kidnappings could deter countries from participating in Iraq's reconstruction and security.

Powell arrived in Iraq after stopping in Saudi Arabia, which has suggested a plan to send Muslim troops to Iraq. (Full story)

Appearing before reporters with Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, Powell was asked about the fate of one of the Indian hostages, whom militants had reportedly threatened to kill if their demands were not met.

Powell said he did not have "specific information" about the hostage but added: "These kinds of violent actions do have a deterring effect" to nations providing troops.

"These are criminals, these are murderers, these are terrorists who are killing innocent people who have come to Iraq," Powell said. (Full story)



see cnn.com for the rest of the story.”

“It was always part of our foreign policy, or so I thought, that we neve negotiate with terrorists.

So then what is Powell during talking to the terrorists in order to secure the release of foriegn hostages for?

Does this go against our policy?

story -

Talks under way to free Iraq hostages

Saturday, July 31, 2004 Posted: 9:08 AM EDT (1308 GMT)


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Talks have begun between representatives of kidnappers and a Kuwaiti trucking company in an effort to free seven truck drivers being held hostage.

A group calling itself the Islamic Secret Army Black Banners Brigades said it is holding hostage three Indians, three Kenyans and an Egyptian who work for the Kuwait and Gulf Link Transport Company (KGL).

A source close to the talks said Mehdi Saleh presented a letter from KGL stating he was its representative to Sheikh Hisham al-Dulemi, who claimed he represented the kidnappers.

The talks began at about 1:30 p.m. Saturday, according to Moqdam Hamid, a spokesman for al-Dulemi.

The two men had previously spoken via telephone, but al-Dulemi wanted a face-to-face meeting to make sure Saleh was indeed representing KGL, Hamid said.

Indian foreign ministry officials said their government has dispatched India's ambassador to Oman, Talmiz Ahmad, to Baghdad in an effort to negotiate the release of the three Indian drivers.

On Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell made a surprise visit to Baghdad and acknowledged that the recent rash of kidnappings could deter countries from participating in Iraq's reconstruction and security.

Powell arrived in Iraq after stopping in Saudi Arabia, which has suggested a plan to send Muslim troops to Iraq. (Full story)

Appearing before reporters with Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, Powell was asked about the fate of one of the Indian hostages, whom militants had reportedly threatened to kill if their demands were not met.

Powell said he did not have "specific information" about the hostage but added: "These kinds of violent actions do have a deterring effect" to nations providing troops.

"These are criminals, these are murderers, these are terrorists who are killing innocent people who have come to Iraq," Powell said. (Full story)



see cnn.com for the rest of the story.”

“Negotiation probably means telling them if they release the hostages we'll only kill them and not their entire family.”

“Like we've been able to kill the others that have beheaded captives?

Have we even gotten to those folks that seperated Mr. Berg's head from his shoulders yet?

This is an obivous about face in foriegn policy and sets a dangerous path.

It shows that this terrorism tactic does win in this instance. It has brought us, yes us, to the negotiation table.

Very dangerous.”

“I'm not arguing.”

“Its obviosu, at least to a healthy population of us, that the unilateral actions exhibited by Bush have been demoralizing for America. While his supporters want to rah-rah around the falg and talk about how strong America is, in reality, this unilateral approach to world issues is sucking the American coffers dry, not only weakening the world opinion of America (anyone who has traveled abroad in the past 6 months can attest to this) but I think damaging trade relations.

Neocons always like to point out Yugoslavia as some sort of vindication or example to hold up against Iraq. However, they are always quick to forget that Yugoslavia was NOT a unilateral action, it was a NATO action. Not some measley "coalition" like Bush claims to have in going in Iraq. Whose troops do we hear about dying in Iraq every day? Ours. This is a burden that should be shared.”

“Rosey - I agree. You've hit uon the "shared cost and benifits" of teh Kerry speach. ON the other hand, i this situation, I really find it hard to believe that we have made any money off this action. It is prefectly legal to pillage the resources of the country invaded in order to pay for its reconstruction. Why isn't this done? I'm sure that it would free up much needed funds. I know the rebels are blowing up stuff, that alone can't be the sole reason, because of the supposed strong infrastructure we have built. Something is not right here.

Phead - I know you're not.”

“What does Iraq have to pillage? Oil seems to be the only item of value. But the oil facilities are being continuously sabbotaged and it seems that is making exports quite tricky.

Por ejemplo:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/19/iraq.oil/”

“Well, oil for one. Gold is another (See the movie Three Kings). Isn't ironic that old Sumeria, land of the plenty, has just been reduced to oil?

I'll add that Iraq has plenty of natural gas, sulfur and phosphates ripe for the pickens!

I'm sure some country can expand its weapons cache with resources like that. Maybe we can sell it to Iran? (toungue FIRMLY in cheek!).

Oil is enough to pillage and make money for them. We could also be re-build the wetland areas that Saddam drained. By doing this type of work, we can ensure Iraq would have the ability to feed its population and have a possible export in the future.

How about renting our some of Saddam's palaces to Disneyland? That would make a ton of money!

heheheee”

“Just watched a Bush speech on CNN where he was speaking in Ohio. Behind him sat 12 guys and 4 women, all white. He lied to the people saying that we are making progress in schools and the economy and healthcare, flying in the face of facts; the economy is not doing better, schools in Ohio are hemmoraging because of the high costs of healthcare, and less people are getting healthcare or paying more for it.

The propoganda was met with cheers.”

“Well, it should be no suprise to anyone when I relate the quote rom last weeks Bush speech at the Urban League convention here in Detroit:

When talking about black voters and the Republican party - "Hey, I know the Republican party has some work to do. I relize that, but I ask you. Do you feel that your vote is takne adavantage of? If so, look at my agenda. Do you think you needs are not taken seriously? Then take alook at my agenda."

I am not able to quote word for word, but from what I relay, it should show what got Rev. Al all hot and bothered about, as he and Bush traded jabs while Bush was on stage. Rev. Al obviously took issue with this speach and used it for motivation.


Bush will have his supporters, we can't expect everyone to abanndon him. In the coming weeks, Bush will get more coverage than the *Johns* because they will have to average out the hammering they're going to give to the Repubs at their convention.

Speaking of, I heard that the portestors were "just using the Dem convention as a warm up". It will be interesting to see what happens in the *pen* when these guys show up at the Convention. Also, it should go as no suprise that the Repub convention will be lack-luster in comparison energy and platform wise to the Dems convention. Now, with all of these defections from his cabinet, the Repubs are going to have to order glue by the barrel full in order to keep the party together.

Mark my words - The Repubs loose this election, they will split almost right after the election and start pointing fingers at each other, ther by giving birth to a strong third party.”

“Doubt it, Laq. It didn't happen after Nixon, it won't happen now.

JMHO”

“Understandable, Phead - but keep in mind that the Repubs just re-aligned and got Reagan afterwards. Plus, the deal Jimmy gave them provided plenty of re-alignment ammo.

This time around, the Repubs are so far left and right within the party that something has to give this time around.

Hey, I don't have a problem if I'm wrong, tho. They're in shambles even IF Bush wins, as they don't have any real young talent in the bullpen to come out in the 2008 election any ways. Who are they going to run that's progresive enough to appeal to the swings, J.C. Watts?”

“Jeb Bush, Colin Powell, AHnold ( assuming they can push through the required amendment), and I'm sure there are a number of people thinking about McCain again...”

“Mark my words - The Repubs loose this election, they will split almost right after the election and start pointing fingers at each other, ther by giving birth to a strong third party."
laqtis
01:55:00 PM
07/31/04

Good luck with that 4 four point bounce (smallest bounce in the history of the poll for any candidate, and that was in the princeton poll which tends liberal, lets see what Ipsos says next week). When Bush wins by more than even I thought before I suggest you blame Terry McCauliffe, he's the one who really screwed this up. Why the hell was the Dem convention in July?”

“LOL!

Good one, Bison! You had me going for a second.”

“You disagree Phaed? Before I thought Bush would win by a few tenths of a percent to 1 percent. Now I'd say two to three percent and 300+ electoral (by + I mean less than 10). Having the convention in July was a major miscalculation, Bush's convention will have much better ratings simply because it is in the traditional campaign season, and Bush now has a major financial advantage as he can spend all of his cash-on-hand up to the convention and will have more to spend post-convention. Kerry did get a boost in his strong support in this poll which is good news for him, but he was already at a huge disadvantage there, he's even with Bush now but he should be well ahead after his convention. Strong support is going to be by far the most important poll number in this convention, much more important than the horse race number, which on election day will most likely be even anyways.”

“But hey at least Kerry will have that military and veterans vote (yeah just like Gore did)

Marines Love Kerry

or maybe not.”

“On the veterans: Every other VFW member I know is voting Kerry or staying home. I haven't done any sort of scientific calculation or polling, but I have spoken to quite a few others about it. There seems to be a concensus of opinion that The Bush administration's handling of Veteran's issues has been deplorable. Most of us don't vote based on single issues, but this one hits pretty close to home.

On the poll: You're pretty optimistic about a weekend poll taken a day after the convention. You really might consider waiting until next week before you make your predictions.

Also, just pushing aside conventional poll-wisdom for a second: Who do you think has been most motivated since the last presidential election?”

“The VFW Phaed, the VFW, my dad's VFW post is filled with Kerry haters I'd doubt a one of them will vote for Kerry, I don't mean people who don't support him, I mean full on hatred.

I would have thought the the Dems would have been motivated, but Bush has led consistently in strong support throughout this cycle. Even in that poll Bush leads in strong support, although within the margin of error now. Also dispite Laqtis' best wishes Bush has led in party support throughout the cycle (as a matter of fact he has consistently polled better among Republican voters than any Pres. including Reagan, they don't release those numbers for princeton though,so we can't compare it now, that's why I want to see the Ipsos poll (ABCNews/Washington Post))The poll was conducted post convention in line with the same poll historically so there is a valid comparison to be made although we have to account for the fact that this is a very different electorate, having the convention so early, outside of the normal campaign season, was a stupid move.”

“BTW, Bison, linking to the NY post, IMO, is only going to convince people who already agree with you.”

“That's probably true, but its certainly not worse than linking to the Times or Washington post. And a lot better than Capitol Hill Blue.”

“Funny, my VFW post is just the opposite, and my father-in-law's in Germany also seemd to be angry about Bush's handling of veteran's issues... Hmmm. It might be geography.

A quick perusal of the Soc.veterans list offers a view of a group that's not in full support of either candidate...

link”

“No, the NY post is not as impartial as the NY times. Argh.”

“The NYT is impartial, ah hahaha ah hahaha, we had to read the times freshman year in college. I'm very familiar with the Times political bent.”

“Whatever - this is a discussion I'm not going to bother having with you.

On veterans, it would seem that more preferred (at the time this poll was taken) Bush/Cheney over Kerry before he picked a running mate. link

Again, my experience could be a result of geography.

That said, I'll bet you that Kerry wins the election. Name the wager.”

“I sure have been seeing more and more stories about Republicans deserting their party. I can guarantee you won't hear anything about it going the other way.

The day Bush loses is going to be a glorious day. It will be a huge burden lifted from my heart...”

“"That said, I'll bet you that Kerry wins the election. Name the wager."

Phaedrus
07:24:04 PM
07/31/04

Loser drives around with a bumper sticker from the campaign of the candidate they did not support from the day after the election through November 30.”

“Too easy, but okay.”

“Phaed - don't look at the new gallup poll I'm telling you this so that you can keep your sanity. :)”

“September 11th Security Fee: A September 11th Security Fee
of $2.50 USD applies per flight segment (maximum charge per
trip--$5.00 USD one-way, $10.00 USD round-trip). A flight
segment is defined as one takeoff and one landing



is this new?”