President Obama (White House photo)
A longtime Democratic foreign policy expert says the Obama administration is proving that the world is a much more dangerous place when the United States fails to lead, and it’s time for Republicans and Democrats to follow the examples of two critical figures in history and galvanize to confront major threats to American national security.
Lawrence J. Haas served as communications director for Vice President Al Gore. He is now a columnist and a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council. His latest book is “Harry and Arthur: Truman, Vandenberg, and the Partnership That Created the Free World.”
President Harry Truman and Sen. Arthur Vandenberg, R-Mich., famously collaborated on the Marshall Plan, the Truman Doctrine and other major projects after World War II to blunt the advance of Soviet aggression in Europe. Vandenberg served as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the critical stretch between 1947-1949.
So how does that story impact today’s world? Haas told WND and Radio America the same tension exists now as it did after World War II between America embracing a role of global leadership and dialing back its involvement on the world stage.
“Historians are inspired to write about history based on current events,” Haas said. “We Americans have been doubting what we can do around the world in recent years. We’ve been rethinking our global role.”
But Haas said the lesson both then and after seven years of President Obama is essentially the same.
“The lesson is, there’s no one waiting in the wings to defend freedom,” he said. “If we step back, there is no great power in the West to defend freedom. There are great threats to freedom out there right now. If not us, then who? That’s the main question that I’m trying to raise for people to ponder.”
In the book, Haas pushes hard against the notion that there was an instinctive consensus in the United States after World War II to lead the fight against Soviet expansion.
“We Americans have this sense that there was this inevitability to America’s rise to global leadership right after World War II, but there was really nothing inevitable about it at all,” Haas said.
But he said the circumstances forced leaders in both parties to conclude that active engagement in the world was the only option.
“World War II is ending. The Soviets were still technically an ally, but they were quickly turning into an adversary because it was clear they were breaking all their promises to allow for free elections in Poland and across eastern Europe,” he said.
“Someone is going to need to step up to ensure global security and defend freedom. There’s nothing inevitable about America stepping in to do this. It takes two men: an enlightened, brand-new Democratic president and an enlightened Senate Republican leader by the name of Arthur Vandenberg.”
Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with Lawrence J. Haas:
if(typeof(jQuery)==”function”){(function($){$.fn.fitVids=function(){}})(jQuery)};
jwplayer(‘jwplayer_gkSxYsss_pszPfxYQ_div’).setup(
{“playlist”:”http://ift.tt/23OxIs9″}
);
Haas said Truman was a consistent advocate for U.S. leadership in world affairs. Vandenberg, on the other hand, backed U.S. entry into World War I. But he later concluded it had been a mistake manipulated by bankers and weapons makers. By the late 1930s, he was one of the leading isolationists in Washington.
The Japanese attacks at Pearl Harbor changed that.
“[The United States] couldn’t wall itself off because, if nothing else, weapons are becoming so sophisticated that there’s no such thing as safety by having an ocean to the east and an ocean to the west,” Haas said. “We needed to play a role because otherwise we would be increasingly vulnerable.”
He said the nation is learning the same lesson the hard way as a result of the Obama administration’s approach to national security threats.
“We have seen an experiment in recent years in American retreat, the president spending the last seven years reducing the American footprint around the world, particularly in the greater Middle East but not only there, in an effort to share global burdens with not only allies but adversaries,” Haas said.
While the parties remain fiercely at odds on some key security issues, Haas believes the people are once again realizing the role the U.S. must play in the world.
“I think that there is growing recognition that American retreat does not lead to a safer world,” he said. “It leads to a more dangerous world. We face right now, probably, the greatest combination of threats to U.S. national security that we have faced since the time of Truman and Vandenberg.”
Haas believes the obvious threat posed by the Soviet Union helped Republicans and Democrats find some critical common ground in the wake of World War II. He said it will be harder to find that consensus again. He ought to know. Haas has publicly ripped the Obama administration and other members of his own party for their approach to the Iran nuclear agreement and other key issues.
Nonetheless, he believes focusing on the greatest threats to U.S. security can forge some common ground again. He sees multiple areas this could happen, most notably with respect to radical Islam. While distinguishing between what he calls Islam and radical Islam, Haas said the latter must be dealt with – including calling it what it is.
“Radical Islam, and there’s nothing wrong with talking about it that way, is a political and a militant movement,” he said. “It’s a global movement, and it threatens people not just in the Middle East, not just in Europe but here in the United States.”
Haas considers the Iran nuclear deal a separate, urgent threat.
“I think there’s great controversy about whether it was wise to cut this nuclear deal with Iran and provide them with all this sanctions relief, billions and billions of dollars to the world’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism,” he said.
Finally, Haas sees some major threats emerging from more traditional sources.
“There is a sense of fear, I believe, about the rise of authoritarian powers around the world, whether it’s China in the Pacific or it’s Russia near Europe,” he said.
“I think there are three or four very prominent threats that are beginning to galvanize people toward a more robust U.S. role around the world to protect itself, to protect its allies and to defend freedom,” he said.
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/ex-clinton-official-world-in-danger-when-u-s-wont-lead/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/ex-clinton-official-world-in-danger-when-u-s-wont-lead/
No comments:
Post a Comment