Home  >  U.S. Politics

How the mid-terms will affect foreign policy

I haven’t had time to finish this piece by Michael Barone at The American Interest, but what I’ve read so far is consistent with what I observed when I was on The Hill. I expect a big fight about Iran sanctions that will pit the President against a broad, bipartisan majority in Congress.

At some point, I expect Kerry to be sacrificed for the President’s continued weakness on foreign policy (update: I mean as measured by the polls), just as Rumsfeld was sacrificed after the 2006 election.

In the final years of their presidencies, presidents tend to move toward their opponents on foreign policy, while grasping for some achievement to burnish their legacies.

0Shares

16 Responses

  2. The Barone piece doesn’t answer this question: why is Iran without nukes a more urgent problem than North Korea with them? Now that Joshua is a Capitol Hill veteran, maybe he can explain it.

  3. I will never understand what anyone sees in John Kerry. He is the most uninspiring, unimpressive, un-confident person I’ve ever seen in national government. Everything about him, from his vacant expression to his over-bred accent to his simplistic metaphors, just screams “I’m in over my head.” And this is the guy we pick to represent the United States in situations where we need to project strength and confidence.

    So, yeah, I would gladly welcome a “sacrifice.”

  4. @Glans

    I can imagine that would be down to the volatile relationship between Iran and Israel. Many countries consider Israel to be quite important. I don’t think anyone would want a war between these two countries, so efforts to diffuse the situation would be ideal.

  5. @Matthew, so it involves Israel? But many countries are concerned about North Korea, and would want to avoid a war between it and South Korea. I could mention China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea itself. Remember, North Korea has nukes and says it intends to keep them, while Iran doesn’t have nukes and says it doesn’t want them.

    So what’s the big deal? Why is Iran a more urgent problem than North Korea? Is Israel more important than South Korea? If so, why?

  6. Glans, have you ever considered the possibility that North Korea and Iran are both urgent problems that our incompetent State Department has failed to address, or is this just the latest manifestation of your unhealthy obsession with Israel?

  9. No, my unhealthy obsession doesn’t extend beyond North Korea, but I try to see it in its global context

    Congratulations on the release of Bae and Miller! Sure, Clapper will get the credit, but your work on sanctions and the ICC referral is the real backstory here.

  10. Iran/North Koreas Nuclear ambitions aside, I think we all know that neither Israel or South Korea would be allowed to fall. It would be a nightmare scenario for many world superpowers, especially the U.S. No one wants a war either.

  11. Interesting quote from Putin – because it is completely content free! He not only fails to identify the “positive results,” he doesn’t even define what they are.

  12. The link doesn’t seem to work. This is the second time it’s happened to me recently. If you want to read Putin’s speech and the following Q and A, look for “Meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club” at the Kremlin website.

  13. A clarification – I didn’t try the link. I was commenting on the statement you quoted. So I guess I didn’t do “due diligence.” My apologies!

  15. @Glans

    Putin is quite the character, he has endeavoured to make himself known to Europe. He has planes flying in international airspace close enough to countries to make them send up fighters to escort them away. He’s done it to quite a few European countries quite often, Nato even notes with concern a spike in activity there. He’s not being aggressive, he’s just flexing some muscle.