Posts
It is fair to state that the diminished influence of Neoconservatives on U.S. foreign policy has indeed occurred after reading the U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' comments this past week to the British strategic studies group, Oxford Analytica.Gates has already shown an aversion to the Cheny/Wolfowitz form of foreign policy. Almost immediately after taking the reins at the Pentagon, Gates influenced the decision for the Iraq troop surge, a not-so-subtle indictment of the established paradigm. Instead of ignoring the importance of NATO and the UN for nation building, Gates has shown a pragmatic stance towards embracing these organizations. He remains open to new lines of thinking regarding Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.
It is not the SecDef's job to craft foreign policy. However, it appears that the Bush Administration is in more and more of a lame-duck mode leaving more responsibilities to others. This is partly evidenced by the starring role, and near-complete control, that has been given to Treasury Secretary Paulson throughout the September financial crisis. A less-noticeable hand-off has happened for a longer duration at the Pentagon where Gates is taking less daily directive from the White House. This influence at the agency level is significant because as Inauguration Day approaches, the subtle effects of these policy shifts will have lasting effects well beyond January.
Make no mistake, Gates remains an appointee of the President. As such, he does not make remarks that conflict with certain politically-sensitive subject matters. However, Gates is putting his stamp on the direction of U.S. military involvement globally; and it appears that his stamp is from a softer ideological ink pad. A well-articulated foreign policy must embrace the nuances of geopolitics with a big, Teddy Roosevelt stick. In other words, just as Chamberlain-level appeasement should not be considered an adequate Foreign Policy, neither should an Irving Kristol-level of preemptive use of force. Gates clearly understands this. At the Oxford Analytica event Mr. Gates articulated that the U.S. foreign policy goal should be, “to balance restraint in international affairs with the resolve and will to back up our commitments and defend our interests when called upon.” Geopolitical Thoughts hopes that the next administration embraces this balanced, gradated approach to international affairs.
It is not the SecDef's job to craft foreign policy. However, it appears that the Bush Administration is in more and more of a lame-duck mode leaving more responsibilities to others. This is partly evidenced by the starring role, and near-complete control, that has been given to Treasury Secretary Paulson throughout the September financial crisis. A less-noticeable hand-off has happened for a longer duration at the Pentagon where Gates is taking less daily directive from the White House. This influence at the agency level is significant because as Inauguration Day approaches, the subtle effects of these policy shifts will have lasting effects well beyond January.
Make no mistake, Gates remains an appointee of the President. As such, he does not make remarks that conflict with certain politically-sensitive subject matters. However, Gates is putting his stamp on the direction of U.S. military involvement globally; and it appears that his stamp is from a softer ideological ink pad. A well-articulated foreign policy must embrace the nuances of geopolitics with a big, Teddy Roosevelt stick. In other words, just as Chamberlain-level appeasement should not be considered an adequate Foreign Policy, neither should an Irving Kristol-level of preemptive use of force. Gates clearly understands this. At the Oxford Analytica event Mr. Gates articulated that the U.S. foreign policy goal should be, “to balance restraint in international affairs with the resolve and will to back up our commitments and defend our interests when called upon.” Geopolitical Thoughts hopes that the next administration embraces this balanced, gradated approach to international affairs.
No comments:
Post a Comment