US Senator Chris
Murphy, who has been in the Senate only a little more than two years and two weeks, is now “Desperately
Seeking A Progressive Foreign Policy,” the tile of a column the senator wrote on his new blog.
According to Mr.
Murphy, the modern progressive movement is still in its swaddling clothes. The
new movement was “founded on foreign policy” after Democrats had spent a couple
of decades "in the wilderness during the era of the Democratic Leadership
Council… in the early days of the Iraq war.”
The modern progressive
movement, Mr. Murphy writes, sprang from Howard Dean’s presidential bid in
2004, during which time “progressives mounted their first serious assault in
years on the conventional thought hegemony by challenging the neoconservative
foreign policy vision. Many of today’s icons of the progressive movement — MoveOn,
Democracy for America, Daily Kos — arguably originate from this fight. Today’s
progressives were molded in the fire of foreign, not domestic, policy.”
The young
progressive movement now has become reactive, “absent, from serious, meaningful
foreign policy debates.” Progressives have been unwilling to engage in such
debates in part because there has been for the last few years a Democrat in the
White House. Mr. Murphy does not point out in his maiden progressive
articulation that President Barack Obama is possibly the most progressive chief
executive since Woodrow Wilson left the White House in 1921. Progressives have
understandably deferred to the Commander in Chief “when it comes to
articulating views on international events.” While such deference to President
Barack Obama is proper, less understandable is the thoughtless rubbernecking
among progressives.
The dominance of US
Senators John McCain and Rand Paul and Mr. Obama ought to concern progressives,
according to the movement’s new John the Baptist, “because none of these three
camps adequately represents the views of most American progressives.”
Mr. Murphy rejects
neo-conservativism robustly as “a non-starter” a “philosophy of knee jerk
military intervention” and “the original motivating force behind the modern
progressive voice.” Isolationism is likewise repugnant “as most progressives
believe in America playing a positive role in the world. We simply believe that
we should lean into the world with something other than the pointed edge of a
sword.”
Mr. Obama struck a
responsive chord in his May 2014 West Point speech, “where he prioritized the
use of our military for counterterrorism efforts and emphasized the need to
strengthen rule of law and human rights in developing nations.” However, “we
break with him on rather substantial questions like domestic surveillance,
drone attacks, and most recently, military intervention in Syria.”
From the
battlements, Mr. Murphy shouts out orders to his progressive troops: “It’s
time for progressives to outline a coherent, proactive foreign policy vision, (emphasis original).”
The organizing
principles of Mr. Murphy’s progressive vision, he writes, would involve: a) “A
substantial transfer of financial resources from the military budget to
buttress diplomacy and foreign aid so that our global anti-poverty budget, not
our military budget, equals that of the other world powers combined,” b) “A new
humility to our foreign policy, with less emphasis on short- term influencers
like military intervention and aid [which Mr. Murphy highly recommended in a)]
and more effort spent trying to address the root causes of conflict,” c) “An
end to unchecked mass surveillance programs, at home and abroad, as part of a
new recognition that we are safer as a nation when we aren’t so easily labeled
as hypocrites for preaching and practicing vastly differently on human and
civil rights,” and d) “a categorical rejection of torture, under any
circumstances.”
A rapid
implementation of Mr. Murphy’s principled vision is necessary because “We are
entering well into the fourth month of unauthorized U.S. military actions in
Iraq and Syria amidst calls from the new Republican Senate majority to send
ground troops back to the Middle East” and “fragile negotiations to end Iran’s
nuclear weapons” program are under threat “from good-intentioned but misguided
efforts to pass new sanctions legislation through Congress.”
These pressing
issues “cry out for a coherent progressive response. But where we end up isn't
as important as committing to the journey. In the coming months, progressives
need to commit ourselves to a process that articulates this new set of ideas.
The world is a mess, and while there is no simple pill America can administer
to fix things, what we know is that there is significant room for progressives
to articulate a foreign policy vision that is truly our own.”
Foreign policy – especially
the Ouija board variety practiced by Mr. Obama, to whom progressives have so
often deferred – is indeed a messy business, particularly now that Mr. Obama is
determined to pursue in the Middle East a policy of accommodation that will
upset neither Iran, a growing Middle East peace broker, or Iran’s patron, President
Of Russia Vladimir Putin, the vanquisher of Ukraine. The tender feelings of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are less important.
A recent request to
the Congress from Mr. Obama for additional presidential authority to prosecute
a war against ISIS, a terrorist group that beheads American Journalists,
murders American aid workers and crucifies Christians, would seem to violate Murphy principle a),
since both the Congressional authority and the funds necessary to prosecute a war
against ISIS for at least three years certainly would not involve a “transfer
of financial resources from the military budget to buttress diplomacy.” It
would also violate Murphy principle b), which calls for a new humility that
emphasizes a greater “effort spent trying to address the root causes of
conflict” rather than investing time and money on “on short- term influencers
like military intervention and aid.” Still we are left with the two remaining
principles of Mr. Murphy’s progressive vision as yet unassaulted by the
progressive Mr. Obama or non-progressives in the US Congress. Rand Paul, an
arch libertarian, has come out strongly against c), snoops hiding in the
telephone receivers of average Americans, and Mr. Obama has long favored
assassination, death by drone, to torture. It turns out that the progressive
principles enunciated by Mr. Murphy in his progressive blog are not all that
cutting edge.
Progressives within
the Democratic Party may want to start looking for a new John the Baptist.
Comments
---------
He's no doubt made up for it with lots of reading and intense briefing from experts, but Murphy's first hand experience of our foreign affairs is quite recent, if not brief. In 1973 Israel was attacked by Syria and Egypt, Russian allies both. He was born as we were giving up in the Greater Vietnam Metro Area. He can't have vivid memories of communist Cambodia, and the minor genocide there. American post-wwii hegemony and leadership in the worldwide fight against communism ? Murphy was only 18 when the Berlin Wall Fell. The celebrations at Williams College were probably even more subdued than those put on by President GHW Bush.
Modesty is a virtue.The Cold War against international communism has been over for more than twenty years. Let's assess our position. What are our national interests and how are they best served? What alliances are desirable and/or practical? (Are we really going to send the troops in the event Russia assaults Estonia? Or, more likely, will Obama drop a desultory bomb and ratchet down the sanctions?) Senator Murphy should disabuse himself of the idea that American hegemony should be maintained, but with an updated, progressive, internationalist, kinder/gentler purpose. It is our national interests that should be clarified and protected. In the doing there's a very good chance that the world will be better off as well. The young Senator's agenda looks rather like Making the World Safe for a Nutmeg Welfare State dedicated to the proposition that We Should Be Equally Nice.
In any case, his lack of experience doesn't make him any more unqualified than those in his Party who experienced the Cold War but seem not to have drawn any, or at least the right, conclusions.
“The momentum that the tea party could get tonight is really what has been keeping me up at night,” Murphy said.
-------------
“A substantial transfer of financial resources from the military budget to buttress diplomacy and foreign aid so that our global anti-poverty budget, not our military budget, equals that of the other world powers combined,”
----------------
I would think with Benjamin Netanyahu coming to speak about what the world will look like if and when Iran gets nuclear weapons, this would be the perfect time to really show how progressive we are. Our military service people are obviously being badly treated by their employer (the Republican corporate militarists). Why not unionize them as we in Connecticut have done with our cops decades ago. If we paid them more and gave them proper medical benefits we'd have less money for gratuitous military interventions; a real win-win.