Foreign Policy, the Candidates, and the Issues We Should be Talking About David A. Lake Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs Professor of Social Sciences Distinguished Professor of Political Science Acting Dean of Social Sciences UC San Diego
Foreign Policy and 2012 Election!No one cares!!this election will turn on the economy, not foreign policy.
Four Schools of U.S. Foreign Policy Internationalist Isolationist Liberal/ Progressive Wilsonians Global engagement for the global good Hamiltonians Nation-building begins at home Conservative Jacksonians Protect American interests and freedom Jeffersonians Small governments do not go forth looking for dragons to slay
Cold War Consensus Liberal/ Progressive Conservative FDR Truman Eisenhower Kennedy Internationalist Isolationist (Robert Taft)
Post-Vietnam Cleavage Liberal/ Progressive Conservative Carter Nixon Reagan Internationalist Isolationist (Hubert Humphrey) (George McGovern)
The New World Order Liberal/ Progressive Conservative Clinton Bush 41 Bush 43 Internationalist Isolationist (Paul Tsongas) (Jerry Brown)
The 2012 Electoral Field Liberal/ Progressive Obama Conservative Romney Gingrich Santorum Internationalist Isolationist (The Obama many thought they were electing) Paul
Who s the Better Friend to Israel?! Obama will support Israel but push for renewed peace talks.! Blocked Palestinian statehood at UN! Advocates starting with pre-1967 borders and land swaps; essentially the Olmert plan from 2008-09! Republicans will support Israel without reservations.! Peace talks only on Israel s timetable! Translates into support for a hardline towards Palestinians and expanded settlements! U.S. politics! Republicans appeal to fundamentalists, who have swung heavily in favor of Israel in the last two decades, and! Jewish voters, who are increasingly conservative
The Problem!How can both Israel and the Palestinian Authority commit to peace?! Majority on both sides willing in principle to adopt two state solution with land swaps! Majority on both sides willing in principle to move forward without Hamas/Gaza; Fatah engages Hamas only to remind Israel of alternative!given history, divisions within the Palestinian community, and continued extremism, PA cannot ensure that attacks on Israel will stop.
The Problem, continued! Given settlers and potential for attacks on Israel, no Israeli government can commit not to intervene in the West Bank.! Israelis themselves are divided between those who want the state to be Jewish and democratic and those who claim Judea and Samaria as integral parts of the land of Israel.
Differing Political Approaches in the U.S.!Republican view: unconditional support for Israel will allow it to feel sufficiently secure to risk peace.! Consistent bipartisan policy for last several decades!(evolving) Democratic view: unconditional support for Israel allows it to be intransigent and to refuse to compromise on the West bank.! Israel must be prodded to roll back settlements and reduce opportunities for clashes between settlers and Palestinians
Who can Stop the Iran Nuclear Weapons Program?!Republicans criticize Obama for not doing enough to stop Iran s nuclear program.!obama points to aggressive sanctions and successful mobilization of the international community to oppose Iran s efforts.
What s the problem with an Iranian Bomb?!Deterrence works! Unprovoked attacks by Iran or even affiliated terrorists extremely unlikely!real problem is that proliferation reduces future bargaining leverage of the U.S.! International negotiations are competitions in risktaking; in disputes, the side willing to take the greater risk that events will escalate out of control wins! Nuclear weapons level the playing field, and make escalatory steps more risky. This reduces the demands we can make on Iran.
Differences in U.S. Policy Toward Iran!Core difference is willingness to use force now to maintain bargaining power in the future.! Santorum advocates preemptive strikes; Romney & Gingrich have explicitly called for military action if all else fails! Obama claims covert actions are successful and is slowly ramping up pressure through increasing sanctions; says military option remains on table!connected to support for Israel, which will also lose bargaining leverage with Iran and Hamas/Hezbollah if program succeeds.
Is China a Peer Competitor?!Obama: cooperative attitude toward China, but hedging bets by redeploying military forces to Asia.!Republicans: generally prefer a tougher line, and may expand naval presence a bit more. Will still be generally cooperative.
What s at Stake with China?!Key debate: what kind of state is China?! Imperialist country that wants to create a regional or potentially global sphere of exclusive influence, or! Status quo country that accepts current international rules and norms!should we contain China or integrate it into the international economy?
U.S. Policy towards China Imperialist China Status quo China US Contains US Cooperates US Contains US Cooperates New Cold War US appeases real competitor US provokes conflict China integrated into US-system
Differences in Policy Toward China!Few: Republicans and Obama all want to preserve cooperation in the hopes that China is a status quo power, but will also hedge their bets by ramping up U.S. presence on the Asian periphery.! Romney more skeptical about China s intentions; might push harder for China to rein in North Korea and constrain its current account surplus (revalue currency).! Santorum more aggressive, criticizes China s godless socialism.
American Exceptionalism!Precisely because actual policies are so similar, debate will focus on rhetorical differences.!american exceptionalism is a flashpoint.!obama s reluctance to use the language of exceptionalism has been turned into a rhetorical device to remind voters that he is different.!republicans will goad him on this theme through the election.
Conservative and Liberal Perspectives!More than 80% of Americans agree the U.S. is exceptional.!conservatives disproportionately believe that American values and culture are superior to those of other nations.!liberals believe that American institutions -- especially checks and balances -- are superior to other countries.! Obama: I think we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our belief in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional.
Conservative Unilateralism!Conservatives expect other countries to defer to the U.S. because of our self-evident virtue.! Prefer more unilateral policies because international institutions limit our ability to act on our goodness!contradiction: The same conservatives who so distrust government at home expect the government to act virtuously abroad -- and for other countries to recognize this fact.! Ron Paul, a Jeffersonian, recognizes this contradiction
Liberal Multilateralism!Liberals expect the U.S. to lead not despite but because of international constraints.! Prefer cooperation through multilateral institutions! Only by creating opportunities for joint decisionmaking will others accept the leadership of the U.S.!Implication: action when it occurs will be less reflective of American interests.!accept constraints on U.S. behavior without necessarily constraining others.
Questions?