Privatization of Foreign Policy Initiative: Latest Articles

Twenty-five years ago, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick famously lambasted Democrats as "blame America firsters" and a party plagued by "self-criticism and self-denigration" of America. It was a speech at pace with an emerging political stereotype that suggested Democrats weren't quite patriotic enough and didn't love their country as much as Republicans did. This image of Democratic weakness and self-doubt became one of the most effective attack lines for Republicans -- and Democrats' greatest political liability.

Civilian control of the armed forces is one of the most sacrosanct tenets of American democracy. It assures us that military decision-making will be subordinate to the larger strategic perspective of our nation's elected -- and ultimately accountable -- leaders.

Once upon a time, there was a grand and influential foreign policy doctrine. It was based on some traditional notions about U.S. statecraft that placed severe constraints on when America went to war. It asserted that when the United States used military force, it must do so in overwhelming fashion and only in the service of vital national interests. For any military action, it counseled the dispassionate weighing of costs and benefits, recommended that policymakers have clear, realistic and achievable political objectives, and called for the

The conventional wisdom in Washington -- and the core of U.S. President Barack Obama's "Af-Pak" policy, which he announced in March -- is that Afghanistan is now the central front in the conflict formerly known as the war on terror. Pakistan is essential too, of course, and indeed, the thinking goes, you can't have a successful Afghanistan policy without a successful Pakistan policy. The problem with this conventional wisdom is that it gets the situation entirely backward: The real fight is in Pakistan, not Afghanistan,

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign, the one criticism heard perhaps more than any other from Republicans was about the cult of veneration that had developed around Barack Obama. He was the “second coming,” the Democrats’ “messiah,” a preening “celebrity,” the political ads joked. But the GOP might have been on to something. For Democrats and their ambitious domestic agenda, it’s all about Obama.