Posted By Blake Hounshell Share

J.DAVID AKE/AFP/Getty Images

Fareed Zakaria sat down with Barack Obama Sunday, and this is how the candidate styled himself on foreign policy:

One of the things that I want to do, if I have the honor of being president, is to try to bring back the kind of foreign policy that characterized the Truman administration with Marshall and Acheson and Kennan.

OK, that doesn't tell us anything so far. George W. Bush also sees himself as Truman's heir. All sides of the U.S. political spectrum have tried to appropriate different aspects of the Truman legacy. But then Obama went on:

But also characterized to a large degree -- the first President Bush -- with people like Scowcroft and Powell and Baker, who I think had a fairly clear-eyed view of how the world works, and recognized that it is always in our interests to engage, to listen, to build alliances -- to understand what our interests are, and to be fierce in protecting those interests, but to make sure that we understand it's very difficult for us to, as powerful as we are, to deal all these issues by ourselves.

It'll be interesting to watch how people react to this, especially as Obama heads to Israel later this week next week.

I, for one, admire the pragmatism of Brent Scowcroft and James Baker. But these are curious role models to cite for a man prone to such soaring rhetoric. Moreover, some folks on the right-hand side of Israeli politics find the two realists par excellence, who under the first President Bush advised meaningful pressure on the Israeli government to stop its settlement activity, not to their liking. Liberal hawks, meanwhile, see them as too bloodless, their realism too narrow.

Readers, what do you think?

(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)

 
Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

NQUIXOTE

4:07 PM ET

July 14, 2008

Obama's foreign policy

To me, Obama's foreign policy sounds fundamentally flexible and non-partisan. John McCain seems to have similar instincts, but the necessities of being a Republican will force him to adopt a more inflexible, partisan stance.
 

NKAPUSTINSKY

9:22 AM ET

July 15, 2008

The New American Realism

It seems the vogue thing these days to attempt to redefine or recapture the "one true" realist tradition. Since Bush II clearly came out of the closet as a hopeless idealist (or a realist-idealist as the neo-cons might say...p.s. remember, Bush ran on a realist platform in 2000) liberals and democrats have come out of the woodwork calling for a return to realism--and there is real power in doing so. The Bush administration has a weak spot when it comes to guys like Scowcroft and Baker, whose cool pragmatism--even in the face of reckless internationalism--has looked more and more prescient as the Iraq war has become less and less something that Bush or his administration can spin positively. Condi Rice's article in FA was certainly an attempt to curb liberal success in this arena...indeed the republican party has much to fear if they are no longer seen as the party of pragmatists. But Obama is still toeing the middle ground. He chooses Acheson (cold war hawk) and Kennan (cold war dove) to describe his realist tradition. My hunch is that he may be trying to cultivate the image of a intellectual and diplomatic Kennan, while recalling the other liberal tradition of the 20th century, epitomized by the hard-nosed Acheson--who, while he was no POW, was certainly no "softer" than, say, a John McCain (think N.S.C. 68)
 

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.

Read More