Much has been made of the Democrats' supposed inability to formulate a foreign policy vision that resonates with the American people. It's surprising, then, that what most Americans,
both Democrats and Republicans, seem to want in a foreign policy is far closer to liberal Democratic positions than conservative Republican ones.
Over at Donkey Rising, Ruy Teixiera has an important post about the recent report "Opportunities for Bipartisan Consensus: What Both Republicans and Democrats Want in US Foreign Policy," published by The Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).
A summary of the main conclusions, based on polls taken in December 2004 (emphasis mine):
...consensus positions. In nearly all cases, they are supported by
a clear majority of both Republicans and Democrats. In a small number of cases, one or the other party was divided, but
in no case was the majority of one party clearly opposed. For many of these positions, leaders were polled as well, and there was also bipartisan consensus among them. In a very small number of cases the positions below were not endorsed by a majority of leaders in both parties but were included if there was a clear public consensus and the overall position among the leaders was supportive.....
The consensus positions were as follows:
THE US ROLE IN THE WORLD
- Do not pursue a general policy that emphasizes disengagement nor US dominance, but rather multilateral cooperation
- Make preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and combating international terrorism the top priorities in US foreign policy
MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS
- Strengthen the UN
- Take part in UN peacekeeping
- Comply with adverse WTO decisions
- Participate in the International Criminal Court
- Give the WHO the power to intervene
US MILITARY CAPACITY
- Do not make further increases in the number of US military bases
- Do not make further increases in defense spending
- Do not develop new types of nuclear weapons
- Continue research on missile defense but do not deploy until proven effective
- Ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
- Participate in the Land Mines Treaty
THE USE OF US MILITARY FORCE: PRINCIPLES
- Only go to war with a government that is developing weapons of mass destruction or supporting terrorists if there is an imminent threat to the US, or the UN Security Council approves
- Use US military force to deal with a humanitarian crisis, especially to stop genocide
- Do not use US military force to replace dictators with democratic governments
- Do not use nuclear weapons except in response to a nuclear attack
THE WAR ON TERROR
- In the effort to fight terrorism, strengthen international law through multilateral institutions, use military force, promote economic development of poor countries and be even-handed in the Israel-Palestinian conflict
- Do not use torture to gain information Do not use torture to gain information....
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
- Limit greenhouse gasses through legislation, including the McCain Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act, even if this would incur significant costs
- Require car manufacturers to meet higher fuel efficiency standards, even if this would increase the cost of buying or leasing a car, and give tax credits for more energy efficient cars and appliances
- Participate in the Kyoto Treaty
- Try to get developing countries to limit greenhouse gas emissions, but do not expect them to actually reduce
TRADE
- Work toward lowering trade barriers while also pursuing more trade adjustment assistance to help American worker to adapt
- Include requirements for minimum labor and environmental standards in trade agreements
- Pursue a Free Trade Area of the Americas
- Do not provide subsidies for large farming businesses, but do provide them for small farmers.
Could this be any better for the Democrats? I mean, some of these positions are to the left of what Kerry campaigned on. Taken together, they could hardly be further from neoconservative unilateralism and militarism.
Is this another case in which, as with domestic policy, the public supports us on issue after issue, but we are missing some sort of value or emotional connection with voters?
Given these views, what in your opinion is preventing the Democratic Party from trouncing the Republicans on foreign policy issues?
Take the poll.
UPDATE: Paul Rosenberg published a diary on this topic last week that delves much more deeply into the results of this study and points out the many disconnects between the foreign policy views of not only Republicans and the American people, but also Republican congressional leaders and Republican voters.