The 2012 Horse Whisperers

Who's giving foreign-policy advice to the crop of GOP front-runners?

BY JOSH ROGIN | JULY 5, 2011

Mitt Romney: American primacy without being promiscuous

Romney, the presumptive front-runner, is the most far along of the major candidates in the development of his campaign's foreign-policy infrastructure. He already has a senior brain trust in place, and that team is well on its way toward establishing the type of foreign-policy advisory groups that major campaigns need in a general election.

The core group includes Mitchell Reiss, the former State Department policy planning director under Secretary of State Colin Powell, Massachusetts former Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, former Missouri Sen. Jim Talent, former top CIA official Cofer Black, and former Coalition Provisional Authority spokesman Dan Senor. This group was also with Romney during his first presidential run in 2008.

A senior Romney advisor told Foreign Policy that the Romney campaign is in the process of setting up a foreign-policy structure that mimics the National Security Council. Working groups will be set up based on regional and functional specialties to develop policy positions on every conceivable issue. The working groups' ranks are to be filled in the coming weeks.

Last year, Romney was working directly with the Heritage Foundation to publicize his opposition to the New START missile reductions with Russia. But now he's broadening the tent, making sure that in these early days any GOP foreign-policy thinkers who want to contribute have a mechanism to do so.

Like the other GOP candidates, Romney links national security strength to economic strength at home -- and believes that America has been underinvesting in the military, dangerously so, and therefore would increase military spending. Among his common rhetorical tropes is that Obama has always been more invested in dealing with enemies than in investing in friendships.

But where Romney veers away from the hawkish script is in his desire to assure voters that he will not engage in wars of choice and is cognizant of the risks of overextending the military.

"The challenge for any Republican candidate is the fatigue that has set in among the American people after three wars," said the advisor. "So how do you convey to them that you're not going to retreat and pull up the drawbridge into Fortress America, which won't work? But at the same time, that you're not going to be promiscuous in your engagements overseas, and when in you engage in them, explain [them] to the American people."

There's evidence that Romney himself is having trouble threading that needle. In the first GOP debate in New Hampshire, he took criticism for saying that "It's time for us to bring our troops home as soon as we possibly can, consistent with the word that comes from our generals," and that "We've learned that our troops shouldn't go off and try and fight a war of independence for another nation.… Only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan's independence from the Taliban.''

But Romney's advistor said that there's no inconsistency in those remarks. All commanders want to bring troops home as soon as possible, and Romney isn't advocating leaving Afghanistan before the job is done. With the independence remark, Romney was simply pointing out that ultimately, the Afghans will have to solve their own problems.

The advisor describes Romney's foreign-policy frame as "American primacy with a heavy dose of selective engagement" and added, "I think that's where most of the party is."

George Frey/Getty Images

 

Josh Rogin writes The Cable blog for ForeignPolicy.com.

ROMAN TILES

8:53 PM ET

July 5, 2011

First Two Comments

What is with the advertising comments? It isn't even political or news related! Unless it's where Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin shop lol C:

 

ROMAN TILES

10:28 PM ET

July 5, 2011

?

Where did their comments go? I am confused now...

 

WHATGREATIS

1:49 AM ET

July 6, 2011

Huntsman

I really hope he becomes the GOP candidate.

 

PAPICEK

10:16 AM ET

July 7, 2011

this is rich...

"three main candidates who are all advocating increased military spending"

When we already spend as much as the rest of the world put together.

I'm rather sorry that I read this article, as I expect no more than political positioning, and I wasn't disappointed. Bacevich is right. I've been right all along. A sane, realistic discussion on policy isn't possible.

 

MLABRECHE

10:17 AM ET

July 7, 2011

What about Ron Paul?

Ron Paul, the only real conservative Republican in the race who advocates a humble foreign policy. Isn't that worth talking about?!

 

ITONLYSTANDSTOREASON

2:22 PM ET

July 7, 2011

Stuck in the Past

Other than Huntsman, these candidates all are stuck in the mindset of good guys vs bad guys, finding an enemy and fighting, rather than finding a competitor or opponent and figuring out how to modify their behavior in support of our national interests.

A problem they face is that Obama is pretty hawkish himself. The only way to get to his right is to promise the contradictory (boosting the economy while diverting more wealth to an over-extended military) and the foolish (enabling more bad behavior by Israel).

I hope someone will call these warriors for democracy on their pretensions. What would they have done about Mubarak? Should the Saudi monarchy come or go? How many years more should we be willing to fight in Afghanistan?

 

AUKPERSPECTIVE

3:11 PM ET

July 7, 2011

What is it with Republican / Tea Party women candidates

I am coming from this from a UK perspective so please forgive my lack of knowledge on US current affairs.

The impression we get in the UK is that you have these very grey Republican men but these amazingly spunky Republican women each with more personality than all the male candidates put together. Plus they do really risky things like drive across the States with bikers. I mean that just could not happen in the UK.

We also do not have a grass roots movement like the Tea Party if fact no European country has. All the folksy religous stuff seems strange too. But most strange of all is that they actually sem to really believe what they are saying which is sort of invigorating.

Of course in could just be a PR trick you coud learn at any marketing corporate event of the Mr(s) Smith Goes to Washington sort of but if so it comes across really convincingly at least in the UK.

Might be different upclose

 

BENJAMINFRANKLIN

4:14 PM ET

July 7, 2011

Political pandering

Republican candidates' foreign policy consists of deciding what the voters want, and then pandering to it. Their problem is figuring out what the voters want. You can be sure that if one of them ends up in power, Israel and the military industrial complex, described by President Eisenhower, will be well taken care of, no matter what the candidate campaigned on.