(Kerry) Foreign Policy Team Takes Center Stage

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1438-2004May29.html

We are going to sieze the mantle of party of national security from the republicans. This time, it will happen.

[DEMVET-USMC]

1. You are right,key to this election is siezing mantle of National Security

And with WAR HERO John Kerry we will do it ! ...Oscar

[SandyUSA]

2. Some questionable Clinton retreads like Sandy Berger...

...but far better than Bush criminal neo-cons.

Foreign Policy Team Takes Center Stage
Advisers Gain New Importance in Campaign
By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 30, 2004; Page A08

James P. Rubin has appeared on more than 60 national and foreign television shows over the past few weeks to outline Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry's positions on foreign policy issues, from Iraq to North Korea, terrorism to weapons proliferation.

A LOT OF THE REST of this article is fluff and not informative about positions the advisers may take.

-------

Here is some very intelligent analysis by Rubin of how Bush shot to pieces the goodwill that America had around the world after 9/11:

Stumbling Into War
James P. Rubin
From Foreign Affairs, September/October 2003

Summary: Why did most of the world abandon Washington when it went after Saddam Hussein? The war in Iraq could never have been an easy sell, but nor should it have been such a difficult one. The Bush administration badly botched the prewar maneuvering, presenting a textbook study in how not to wage a diplomatic campaign.

James P. Rubin is a Visiting Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and was Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs from 1997 to 2000.

A DIPLOMATIC POSTMORTEM

After the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States put together a historic, worldwide coalition to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda. China, India, Japan, Pakistan, and Russia all supported the enterprise, as did Europe. The subsequent war may have scattered al Qaeda rather than destroyed it -- key operatives remain at large today -- but the mission was widely seen as a success.

Eighteen months later, the Bush administration went to war again, this time to overthrow Saddam Hussein. On this occasion, however, most of the same countries that had backed the United States in Afghanistan bluntly opposed the campaign -- as, indeed, did most of the world. Washington's failure to muster international support to depose a despised dictator was a stunning diplomatic defeat -- a failure that has not only made it harder to attract foreign troop contributions to help stabilize post-Saddam Iraq, but will more generally damage U.S. foreign policy for years to come.

---------

I LIKE THIS PART... since resolving the Israel/Palestine is key to getting a handle on lessening the dangers of terrorist response.

Rubin says some pages into his article:

A final reason for the loss of goodwill toward the United States was the White House's approach to peace in the Middle East. Although most of the world recognizes how difficult stopping Arab-Israeli violence will be, they expect the U.S. government to try. Bush's across-the-board support for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, therefore, and his administration's lack of high-level engagement in the peace process prior to this summer made it hard for Washington to attract support for its war in Iraq. Blair, at least, understood this problem and pushed Bush hard to commit political capital to getting both the Palestinians and the Israelis to compromise. Although the White House did begin to move in this direction right before the invasion of Iraq began, its effort was too little and too late to repair the damage done by its two years of studied avoidance of this critical issue.

Go here to read entire article -- many will be impressed:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030901faessay82504/james-p-rubin/stumbling-into-war.html

[union_maid]

3. This is just excellent

There is going to be no time for the next administration to get settled in, make appointments and set an agenda and the agenda can't really be set in stone now, due to the volatility of the situationa and the instability of the current administration. Having this experienced and expert team already working on the problems and, in fact, becoming a team is a huge plus for the country.

[Adelante]

4. Pooh-Bahs, very funny

"Since Kerry wrapped up the presidential nomination in March, however, many of the Democratic Party all-stars have signed on and are injecting new energy. Now in the midst of an 11-day blitz on foreign policy, Kerry is also being advised by former secretary of state Madeleine K. Albright, former U.N. ambassadors Richard C. Holbrooke and Bill Richardson, former defense secretary William J. Perry, former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, former NATO commander Gen. Wesley K. Clark, and Sen. Joseph R. Biden (Del.), ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.

"Rubin likened it to a government-in-exile since most served in the Clinton administration -- a stark contrast to the previous two Democratic presidents, who faced building staffs and formulating positions after long periods of the party being out of power.

"Kerry's staff jokingly calls the inner circle the Pooh-bahs, from the 1885 Gilbert and Sullivan opera "The Mikado." The word originally meant "Lord-High-Everything-Else" and has come to signify a person of great influence or high position."

~snip~

"Although some Kerry staff aides cringe at their nickname, Holbrooke jested upon hearing that he is called a Pooh-bah, "It's the highest rank I've ever held, and I hope by the end of the campaign to be promoted to pasha."

:7

[smiley_glad_hands]

5. I'd rather be a Pooh--bah than a Vulcan.

Just give beer.

[Moderator]

6. Duplicate

Duplicate, please continue discussion in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x591174