Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy Hillary Clinton Should Fear Robert Kagan
Why Hillary Clinton Should Fear Robert Kagan
By Leslie H. Gelb - March 14, 2016
On Monday, National Interest editor Jacob Heilbrunn sat down for a discussion with Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, a former columnist for the New York Times and a former senior State and Defense Department official.
Jacob Heilbrunn: Why should Hillary Clinton fear Robert Kagan?
Leslie H. Gelb: She should fear Robert Kagan because he provides an intellectual basis for her worst instincts. Her instincts are to solve problems by force, to assert American might. And then most of the problems were facing nowthe lead of our foreign policy should not be force. Force has got to be there, and it's got to play a role, particularly in the issue of terrorism, fighting terrorism. But basically, its got to be diplomacy and economics, and organizing alliances for action to tackle these problems. Thats got to come first. And Kagan really doesnt put much store in organizing coalitions to tackle problemsits all about assertion of American might.
JH: In your article in Democracy, you went through Kagan book by book. What was your conclusion about the body of his work? How does it stand up?
LG: I dont think it stands up well in terms of the substance of foreign policy. Ill give you one example, but this really is typical in many ways. He denigrates the importance of economics in international politics in the twenty-first century. Where I would say, that month in, month out, the single most potent factor in the power of a nation is its economic strength, and its ability to organize international activity in economicsin trade and investment and so forth. Thats what concerns most leaders and most nations most of the time. And he tosses it away. And specifically, in his last book, he denigrates the importance of China, except for its growing military strength. The economy doesnt mean anything, even though by some measures its the largest economy in the world. And countries all over the world particularly in Asia have to pay attention to China. China is the biggest trading partner for them, and the biggest investor. That matters.
Let me say one thing further. One thing that neocons say, that really rings home, and hits the liberals in the gut, is the liberals denigration of military power. Its gone too far. And its as if for liberalsand even for many moderatesmilitary power doesnt play a role anymore. You look at the failures in Iraq, and Afghanistan, too, and say, See? Military power doesnt count. In fact, it leads us astray. But to deal with the problem of terrorismespecially in Syria, but elsewhere as welltheres got to be military force. And while our role should not be another land war where were in the lead, where it becomes Americas warthats where the neocons always fall short. They want to turn everything into Americas war. But its got to involve war. And weve got to be the ones to put together a military alliance to fight terrorism in Syria, Iraq, Turkey....
Read More:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-hillary-clinton-should-fear-robert-kagan-15492
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
0 replies, 518 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post