It is understandable that foreign policy has taken a back seat to what is viewed as more pressing concerns: jobs, unemployment, debt, and entitlements. However, just a quick view of the world’s landscape and an articulated foreign policy is greatly needed. The Middle East is once again a hotbed of radicalization and chaos. Iran continues to nibble at the edges of American hegemony. Relations with Israel have never been poorer and the Palestine debate is gaining new life in the UN. China is doing as predicted in expanding its military capabilities and it is only a matter of time – probably this decade – when it leaves its insular world and directly challenges the US in South East Asia.
Strangely, considering the modern GOP’s strong legacy in foreign policy, the Republican candidates – and their conservative voters – are divided on the nature of America’s role in the world. Very surprising if one considers that two sizable armies are currently deployed in two countries. To say that President Obama’s liberal internationalist approach has failed goes without saying. Aside from that, and more to the point, how do the Republican candidates for president view American’s role in the world. What will be the direction of America under new Republican leadership?
Will the sting of economic problems and the extravagance of our foreign policy at the expense to other concerns embolden the realists that reside in the party? Or will American Exceptionalism resurface during a time when so many Americans view their nation with less confidence than at any time in the past thirty-plus years? This conundrum is not unique to Republican history. President Nixon and Kissinger devised their version of détente, triangulation, and chose to engage China over challenging it. Nixon ended the Vietnam War under the idea of “peace with honor” as Charles de Gaulle had in Algeria and prepared the world for a bipolar existence, one side free, the other under tyranny.
President Reagan had a much different view of American foreign policy. He had no use for détente, felt Kissinger was misguided on Soviet policy, and had no use for Carter’s liberal internationalism. He called for a new robust foreign policy that would put America at the forefront in all international concerns as an indispensible nation. Unique were his views that through military and diplomatic strength; America would use its single greatest arsenal, morality. He barraged the Soviet Union and world communism not with bombs and missiles, but by verbally and eloquently challenging its morality and legitimacy. It was confrontation on a political scale. It was done, however, from a position of strength. Unnerved and undeterred by the Cold War and the specter of communism, Reagan led America out of its malaise and managed to bring the Cold War to a close at the same time. He used leadership, imagination, and rested in comfort from the belief that America was different, unique, and destined.
That world no longer exists. That century has passed and that kind of leader has yet to emerge. However, America is once again at a fork in the road. The circumstances in which we face are striking in similarities. A lot of Americans still view the nation as second to none. But the reality of our time is causing more to focus inward. Does that give a free pass to candidates to play it safe?
How will the candidates, each vying for a place in history, choose to lead America abroad? What will be America’s role internationally over the next 5 or 10 years? Those who wish to be the next president must lead on that position and put together the argument and choose between realism and exceptionalism. To date, all have failed in delivering the goods outside of rhetoric and staying ideologically safe. Gathering data from polls can be misleading. Polls are snapshots of people’s confidence; a feeling in a particular moment in time. Feelings and perspectives are fluid and can be channeled toward a different direction if convinced there is an alternative. That takes leadership and conviction from an effective communicator. Traits that are sparse and rarely does one individual possess them all. And right now, America and the world for that matter, desperately needs them.
Can America still produce such a leader?
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.