The Scowcroft Factor
Via Josh Marshall, an interesting Wall Street Journal account of Brent Scowcroft’s behind-the-scenes role talking to Barack Obama and trying to push some of his younger protégés as job candidates.
To understand the context for this, it’s important to recall that the ideological spectrum around foreign policy elites isn’t sorted all that well. On economic issues, moderate Republicans are almost all still to the right of moderate Democrats. But on foreign policy, traditional Republican realists have a lot more in common with liberal Democrats than either do with Democratic hawks. Both are likely to have opposed the Iraq War or soured on it early. Both are likely to be skeptical of the idea that we should base our foreign policy on self-righteousness. Both are likely to appreciate the importance of taking a balanced approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict. And both are likely to be skeptical of the idea that the highest expresion of humanitarian impulses is launching unilateral wars surrounded by high-minded rhetoric.
Under the circumstances, outreach from Obama to Republican realists would constitute a counterpoint rather than an intensification of outreach from Obama to Hillary Clinton’s top level of supporters and advisers.
36 Responses to “The Scowcroft Factor”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 24th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I think that the contrast between “Republican realists” and supposed “Democratic hawks,” and the alignment of Clinton and her friends with the latter camp, is a bit superficial. Most of the Democrats who supported the Iraq War didn’t do so out of some general preference for military solutions to international problems, or from a sincere faith in the benefits of “humanitarian” military intervention. Is Tom Daschle really a “Democratic hawk?” What about Joe Biden, or John Kerry, or Chris Dodd, all of whom voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq?
In fact, I think the most important thing separating anti-war voices like Dean, Obama and Clark from the initial war supporters like Biden, Kerry, Daschle, Dodd, and Clinton was that the latter were members of the US Senate in 2002-2003, and the former weren’t.
Similarly, the supposed philosophical differences between Obama and Clinton on foreign policy that drew attention during the primary were to some extent a matter of political positioning, and not necessarily meaningful indicators of policy postures in an eventual Clinton or Obama administration. This is why an anti-war voice like Clark could be a Clinton supporter, and why Obama has few qualms about calling on Biden or Clinton for high-level positions. Much of the intraparty campaign back-and-forth that bloggers obsess over has little actual policy significance.
November 24th, 2008 at 10:51 am
The problem with President Elect Osama listening to the Skowcrofts and the Brzezinskis of the world is that they have a naive belief that somehow an Israeli/Palestinian peace agreement is achievable. Unfortunately, they are living in a dream world. The Palestinians continue to make the unacceptable demand that the folks living in refugee camps be resettled in Israel. The Israelis insist that this notion is unacceptable. There is, in fact, no possible compromise on this issue. Until such time as the Palestinians realize that hell will freeze over before this happens, there will be no peace.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:37 am
I think it’s only the weirdness of the present moment in which we can talk about realists and liberals having so much in common. There’s an older and simpler liberal wisdom towards foreign policy which still makes a lot of sense, about what you do before you have a Saddam Hussein: something along the lines of “don’t arm assholes.”
This is not realist thinking.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:55 am
they have a naive belief that somehow an Israeli/Palestinian peace agreement is achievable.
Right, except it’s not “naive.” (In fact, what was really naive was the Republican-neoconservative view that we could impose democracy on the whole middle east at the point of a gun.) Remember, Bill Clinton nearly made the deal ten or more years ago. The real reason there’s been complete failure since than was Bush’s buying into the naive military democracy-creation theory mentioned above. A new realistic foreign policy group can actually achieve peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Both sides there are nearly exhausted, and they’d welcome a settlement.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:57 am
That second para should not be italicized.
November 24th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Re David in NY
What Mr. David in NY fails to comprehend is that the Clinton administrations’ attempts to achieve a settlement foundered on the Palestinian demand that inhabitants of refugee camps be resettled in Israel. Given that the Palestinians, or at least their leadership was unwilling then and is unwilling now to give up this demand, the Clinton effort never had a chance and any effort by President Elect Osama is also doomed to failure. As for the two sides being exhausted, the Hamas folks are not exhausted. They never get tired, being, like the born agains in this country, intoxicated by religious fanaticism, much like junkies on speed.
November 24th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Philip Weiss on Scowcroft etc:
http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2008/11/rahm-zbig-brent-hillary-triangulationkumbaya-.html
November 24th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
President Elect Osama
Buh-bye.
November 24th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
SLC repeatedly predicted there was no way that Obama, being a black person, could win the Presidency this year.
SLC was also a believer in the great birth certificate conspiracy theory.
November 24th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
SLC:
1. Seriously, don’t be juvenile. Nobody thinks calling Obama “Osama” is funny or clever. It just makes you look like a bigot.
2. On the merits, I actually share your skepticism of whether Middle-East peace is achievable. I bet you that many of the folks who call for negotiations (including, perhaps, Scowcroft and even Obama) may even share your skepticism.
This is one of those issues where it is important to be seen as TRYING, even if success is not attainable. It’s just like India-Pakistan and China-Taiwan. In each case, we have to work with people on both sides of the conflict on other important issues, both sides care intensely about the conflict and have conflicting narratives, and not working on a resolution will raise serious charges of favoritism which could make it impossible for us to advance American interests.
November 24th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Re DTM
Mr. DTM has accurately noted that I stated previously that, IMHO, the country was not ready for a black president (or a woman for that matter). I could not have predicted the economic mess created by the incompetent administration of the coke snorting, pot smoking, draft dodging, lying drunk in the White House, nor the incompetence of Senator McCain in choosing a whackjob like Governor Palin as his running mate. Had neither of these two incidents occurred, IMHO Mr. Obama would have lost the election.
Re Ed Marshall
It ain’t over until the fat lady sings.
http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/supreme-court-to-conference-on
Re Dilan Esper
Unfortunately, the Brezinskis and Skowcrofts of the world have concluded that the way to a peaceful settlement of the Israel/Palestinian problem is to apply pressure on Israel to make concessions. They are sadly deluded. The only concession that would cause the Palestinians to sign on the dotted line is an agreement by the Government of Israel to go out of business.
Re otto
mr. Phillip Weiss, like Mr. otto, is in favor of the Government of Israel going out of business. He and Mr. otto are cordially invited to go fuck themselves.
November 24th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Really? The birth certificate thing?
Oh, dear.
My favorite version of that story is that Obama didn’t want to release his birth certificate because he had changed his name. You see, he was originally named “Barack Mohammed Obama,” but his sleeper cell commander decided that such a middle name could pose difficulties in his political career.
So they changed it to something more All-American: “Hussein.”
November 24th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
So we’re supposed to believe that Joe “I’m a Zionist” Biden didn’t vote for the Iraq war on the orders of Israel? That he really was convinced Iraq was an “imminent threat to the US” and had nuclear weapons hidden under Saddam’s bed (on the intelligence from Israel, no doubt)?
We’re supposed to believe that Biden – and Obama – don’t REALLY intend to force Iran into completely and totally suspending enrichment – something which, like SLC’s fantasies about the Palestinians, really isn’t possible?
We’re supposed to believe that Obama is a “foreign policy realist”?
Based on what? Obama’s campaign rhetoric? Or his STATED POLICY POSITIONS – not to mention the people he’s hiring to implement them – ALL of whom are “Democratic hawks” – when they aren’t Republican retreads like Gates.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:47 am
Unfortunately, the Brezinskis and Skowcrofts of the world have concluded that the way to a peaceful settlement of the Israel/Palestinian problem is to apply pressure on Israel to make concessions. They are sadly deluded. The only concession that would cause the Palestinians to sign on the dotted line is an agreement by the Government of Israel to go out of business.
Well, the issue isn’t whether they push Israel to make a concession, but whether they push it to make one that compromises its security. Not all concessions are created equal, you know.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Re DTM
Making predictions in politics is a lot like making predictions in NFL football, NBA basketball, or Major League Baseball. As a former sports talk show host, Ken Beatrice put it, one can make predictions in sports but the one thing that can’t be predicted is injuries. Injuries determine all. Don’t believe it, just ask Bill Belichick and Eddie Jordan.
Re Dilan Esper
The problem is, who decides what compromises might have an adverse affect on Israels’ security. People like Mr. Yglesias safely ensconced in Washington, D.C. or people living in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities.
November 25th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
The problem is, who decides what compromises might have an adverse affect on Israels’ security. People like Mr. Yglesias safely ensconced in Washington, D.C. or people living in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities.
Israel is no shrinking violet, SLC. I assume that Israeli elected officials are likely to know when to hold ‘em and know when to fold ‘em.
November 25th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Instead of getting into an endless argument about Israel and Palestine, lets look at the big picture.
Think back to the Bush-the-elder administration. The steady hand on the tiller, deft handling of international affairs was the best thing about it.
If Obama is trying to emulate it, I am all for it.
It also helps keep Conservative Realists in the Democratic coalition (Obama 2012!) all the better.
November 25th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Oh, and by the way, don’t forget that throughout the campaign when asked, Obama said that he most admired the foreign policy of Bush the elder.
December 1st, 2008 at 2:38 pm
David. What makes you think both sides are exhausted? Maybe Olmert and Abbas are exhausted, seeing as how they are both still hoping for a two-state solution. But George Bush’s endorsement of a two-state solution was the kiss of death. Neither Likud or Hamas is interested, and both have a democratic mandate to continue fighting. SLC says that Hell will freeze over before Palestinians will be able to return to Palestine. I think that’s a misreading of the historical forces at work in the Middle East. Since Hamas and Israel both claim the same land, we are in effect faced with a civil war, in which the U.S. has really no brief, Obama to the contrary. A “Jewish State” is an anathema for Jeffersonian democracy. If Obama takes sides in this civil war, the Middle East, if not Afghanistan, will be his – and our- Viet Nam.
March 13th, 2009 at 12:07 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:53 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 2:36 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:32 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:45 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:28 am
Incredible site!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Very interesting site, Hope it will always be alive!
viagra