The following is a letter I sent to Kerry's campaign on Friday highlighting what I feel are elements of John Kerry's platform - these ideas are on his webiste -that need to be foregrounded better as part of more comprehensive foreign policy "vision." Read it and tell me what you think. What are your ideas for JFK?
To Whom it May Concern,
First, I'd like to preface these remarks by saying that I was attracted to a
potential Kerry candidacy well before John's actual announcement. I think many of his positions were well thought out and truly grapsed the fundamental dimensions and problems of the world we live in today. Unlike most of his rivals, John really seems to grasp the interconnectedness of terrorism, the global economy, the environment, and energy supply.
However, I have been disappointed by how John has been positioning himself recently in terms of the foreign policy debate. John needs to present an overarching foreign policy VISION. Rather than critiquing the Bush administrations failings or responding to the Bush administration's attacks, he needs to campaign on a foreign policy platform that provides a POSITIVE FOREIGN POLICY VISION that does not use the Bush administration's policies as its reference point.
In this regard, I think John needs to address two points: one he has done well, the other not so well. Firstly, John has done a good job of presenting a policy of how to deal with the IMMEDIATE threat of terrorism and how to stop it from taking lives - ie particularly homeland security. However, I do not think John has done a good job of laying out a platform - or at least getting out his message - of how to deal with the larger intellectual issues at stake. In this regard, I think there are two points to be made that would do his candidacy a world of good. Firstly, make it clear that the US and his administration is fully committed to the process of democratization in Iraq - that no matter what one'sviews
were before the invasion as to its merits, it is in the WORLD'S interests that
a process of TRUE DEMOCRATIZATION really occurs. In this sense, if John is forthright in making this point, the Bush administration's politically motivated occupation "timetable" can be better criticized. Secondly, and probably more important, is for John to get more upfront about his ideas of engaging the Islamic World in terms of promotingeducation, economic opportunity, and democracy in the region. He has some good ideas on this issue - but make sure that people know that he has a long term strategy for dealing with Islamic terrorism/radicalism's root causes. Encouraging trade, business and educational
exchange, translating American classics into Arabic, using American leverage to
encourage internal reform all should be a part of this. In others words, the US
needs to make much better use of its SOFT POWER if it is to succeed. But make sure these ideas are made proactively, NOT as a response to the Bush adminstration.
If John can do this, I think he stands a good chance of defeating Bush this fall. Domestic issues favor John, and there is a sense that Bush and co are corrupt and incompetent. However, if John is incapable of articulating a wideranging foreign policy platform of which the American people are made aware, potentially none of this will matter. This is not a time when "its the economy stupid" is enough - not so soon after 9/11. Americans need to feel "comfortable" enough with John in this regard to vote Bush out - if John reaches this comfortability level, he will win, because Bush has very little else torun on. I KNOW from reading John's positions in the past that he shares my feelings on the above - but it is imperative that the American people as a whole see a PROACTIVE foreign policy vision as well. If not, Bush's tough guy act will be reassuing enough to enough voters to ensure a reelection he does not deserve.