John Edwards' worldview

John Edwards' essay for Foreign Affairs - Reengaging with the World - is the sixth in BritainAndAmerica's series of summaries of the worldviews of leading presidential candidates.

The Iraq war was one of the greatest strategic failures in US history: "We must move beyond the wreckage created by one of the greatest strategic failures in U.S. history: the war in Iraq. Rather than alienating the rest of the world through assertions of infallibility and demands of obedience, as the current administration has done, U.S. foreign policy must be driven by a strategy of reengagement."

America must reverse its low standing in the world: "A recent Pew survey showed the United States' approval ratings plummeting throughout the world between 2000 and 2006. This decline was especially worrisome in Muslim countries of strategic importance to the United States, such as Indonesia, where approval dropped from 75 percent to 30 percent, and Turkey, where it fell from 52 percent to 12 percent. Perceptions of America's efforts to promote democracy have suffered as well. In 33 of the 47 countries surveyed by the Pew Research Center, majorities or pluralities expressed dislike for American ideas of democracy.  We need a new path, one that will lead to reengagement with the world and restoration of the United States' moral authority in the community of nations... There was a time when a president did not speak just to Americans -- he spoke to the world. People thousands of miles away would gather to listen to someone they called, without irony, "the leader of the free world." Men and women in Nazi-occupied Europe would huddle around shortwave radios to listen to President Franklin Roosevelt. Millions cheered in Berlin when President John F. Kennedy stood with them and said, "Ich bin ein Berliner." Millions of people imprisoned behind the Iron Curtain silently cheered the day President Reagan declared, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Even if these ordinary men and women did not always agree with our policies, they looked to our president and saw a person -- and a nation -- they could trust. Today, under the current administration, this is no longer the case. At the dawn of a new century, it is vital that we win the war of ideas in the world."

We should stop using the 'war on terror' expression: "From Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib, the "war on terror" has tragically become the recruitment poster al Qaeda wanted. Instead of reengaging with the peoples of the world, we have driven too many into the terrorists' arms. In fact, defining the current struggle against radical Islamists as a war minimizes the challenge we face by suggesting that the fight against Islamist extremism can be won on the battlefield alone.  For these reasons, many generals and national security experts have criticized the president's "war on terror" approach. Retired Marine General Anthony Zinni has said that the "war on terror" is a counterproductive doctrine. So has the government of one of our closest allies; the new British prime minister, Gordon Brown, has distanced himself from the term. Admiral William Fallon -- President George W. Bush's new chief of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) -- has instructed his staff to stop saying that we are in a "long war." These leaders know that we need substance, not slogans."

All combat troops must be withdrawn from Iraq: "Iraq's problems are deep and dangerous, but they cannot be solved by the U.S. military. For over a year, I have argued for an immediate withdrawal of 40,000 to 50,000 U.S. combat troops from Iraq, followed by an orderly and complete withdrawal of all combat troops. Once we are out of Iraq, the United States must retain sufficient forces in the region to prevent a genocide, a regional spillover of the civil war, or the establishment of an al Qaeda safe haven. We will most likely need to retain quick-reaction forces in Kuwait and a significant naval presence in the Persian Gulf. We will also need some security capabilities in Baghdad, inside the Green Zone, to protect the U.S. embassy and U.S. personnel. Finally, we will need a diplomatic offensive to engage the rest of the world -- including Middle Eastern nations and our allies in Europe -- in working to secure Iraq's future. All of these measures will finally allow us to close this terrible chapter and move on to the broader challenges of the new century."

America must provide moral leadership on Darfur: "NATO must establish a no-fly zone over the region to cut off supplies to the brutal Janjaweed militias and end the Sudanese government's bombing of civilians in Darfur. NATO member states should also impose a new round of multilateral sanctions on the Sudanese government and freeze the foreign assets of individuals complicit in the genocide. The United States must make a decisive new commitment to employ the extraordinary assets of the U.S. military -- our airlift capabilities, logistical support, and intelligence systems -- to assist UN and African Union peacekeeping efforts in Darfur. And we must continue to pressure other countries with influence in the region, such as China, to meet their own responsibilities to help end this conflict."

America should negotiate directly with Iran to stop it becoming a nuclear power: "Every major U.S. ally agrees that the advent of a nuclear Iran would be a threat to global security. We should continue to work with other great powers to offer Tehran economic incentives for good behavior. At the same time, we must use much more serious economic sanctions to deter Ahmadinejad's government when it refuses to cooperate. To do this, we will have to deal with Iran directly. Such diplomacy is not a gift, nor is it a concession. The current administration recently managed to have one single-issue meeting with Iran to discuss Iraq. It simply makes no sense for the administration to engage Iran on this subject alone and avoid one as consequential as nuclear proliferation."

China, Russia and India: "The U.S.-Chinese relationship is a delicate one, which has not been well managed by the current administration. In the coming years, China's influence and importance will only continue to grow. On issues such as trade, climate change, and human rights, our overarching goal must be to get China to commit to the rules that govern the conduct of nations... Our most important goal is to draw Russia into the Western political mainstream through continued engagement and, when necessary, diplomatic and economic pressure... I have seen for myself that India is one of the world's richest treasures. With its great history, tremendous people, and rich culture, India has truly overwhelming potential. The United States is fortunate to count India as a partner, and we must cultivate our friendship to advance our common values. India is a country that knows both the positive and the negative aspects of our globalized world. It has achieved remarkable economic growth, benefiting from access to technology and information. Yet the nation also grapples with threats that refuse to respect borders -- the AIDS pandemic, extreme poverty, and terrorists, such as those who struck New Delhi late in 2005. The United States and India are natural allies, and the U.S.-Indian strategic partnership will help shape the twenty-first century. We must therefore strengthen our relationship using both national and international tools: reforming the UN so that there is a place for India on the Security Council and working with India to help it achieve a credible and transparent plan to permanently separate its civilian and military nuclear programs."

No commitment on defence expenditure but a rebalancing of capabilities and missions must occur: "Some have fallen right in line behind President Bush's recent proposal to add 92,000 troops between now and 2012, giving little rationale for exactly why we need this many men and women, particularly with a likely withdrawal from Iraq. But the problem of our force structure is not best dealt with by a numbers game. We must be more thoughtful about what the troops would actually be used for. Any troops we add now would take a number of years to recruit and train, and they would therefore not help us today in Iraq.  As president, I will rebalance our forces to ensure that the size and capabilities of our military match its missions."

More emphasis on international development: "As president, I will create a new cabinet-level position to coordinate global development policies across the government. I will also replace Kennedy's Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 with a Global Development Act to modernize and consolidate development assistance, and I will ask Congress to improve its oversight and revamp its committee structure so that it can be a more effective partner in this effort. With measures like these, we can reclaim our historic role as a moral leader of the world while at the same time making the world safer and more secure for the United States."

Comments

[Malcolm Dunn]

Whilst what he said about the US President used to be able to speak to and for 'the free world' is true, much of the rest will not go down well with a US audience. Why should the average American care about how the USA is regarded in Indonesia or anywhere else, including Britain.
I agree with what he said about attempting to negotiate with the Iranians but it's probably irrelevant because Edwards is not going to win the US Presidency.

[Ron Paul supporter]

The Editor has ignored Ron Paul again! More instructions from his neo-con cronies in Washington DC?

[powellite]

"The Editor has ignored Ron Paul again! More instructions from his neo-con cronies in Washington DC?"

It's a scandal, I agree. Outrageous. Er...remind me who he is again? Does he present an American chat-show or something?

[Tony Makara]

There is no doubt in my mind that John Edwards is by far the most sensible of the democratic contenders. Particularly in relation to foreign affairs. The call to repair the damage done to America's reputation after Iraq is a very important one. The goodwill towards America that was squandered after 9/11 has to be restored. John Edwards is a man who looks carefully at the possible long-term outcome and won't dash into making rash decisions. I believe John Edwards has been overlooked as Clinton and Obama have excited the media because they offer the potential of a first female or first black president, however to my mind Edwards would be the best democrat to be president.

[Andy Peterkin]

He is a vastly wealthy lawyer who has made millions out of the sort of lawsuits we all like to laugh about when we read them in the papers in a kind of "thank God that doesn't happen over here" kind of way. He once tried to use a medium to "channel" a dead child in court to give evidence.

The man is a clown who has no business anywhere near the Presidency this or any other year.

[Ron Paul supporter]

Ron Paul broke the single day fundraising record in December - over $6 million dollars. He also raised over $4 million in one day in October. In each case, the average donation was between $100 and $200. Paul literally tens of thousands of individual donors, unlike the establishment Republicrat and Demopublican candidates who rely on big business and vested interest groups like the Israeli lobby.

[Ben Stevenson]

Ron Paul supporter,
So far John McCain, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and John Edwards have been featured.

That means that Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter and Alan Keyes from the Republican contest have not been covered.

There are also Joe Biden, Mike Gravel, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, and Dennis Kucinich still to be covered from the Democrat side.

There is no anti-Ron Paul conspiracy here. Despite Ron Paul's impressive fundraising, he is not doing so well in the polls.

[S Baker]

"The goodwill towards America that was squandered after 9/11 has to be restored." What are you talking about? There was no good will, only empty platitudes when the rest of the west realized this was a struggle to the death and that they could no longer pretend to support us and have huge contracts with sodamn insane! The west better band together to fight ISLAMIC terror or we will end up cowering one-by-one. If the US goes down, who will have the will to fight them?

[Tony Makara]

S Baker, I take it you will be offering your services for auxiliary work in Iraq then? Or do you prefer to have brave soldiers dying for your anti-islamic crusade?

[Steevo]

Tony Makara, I take it you will be offering your judgments to the podium in Iraq? Or do you prefer more tyrants as you sit in self-righteous spite over American power?

[Tony Makara]

Steevo, Why do you have a preoccupation with the idea that other nations envy and have spite for American power? You will find that people in general were highly supportive of America before Iraq. The invasion and occupation of Iraq has been based on a lie, thats why people are so upset. People don't like being lied to, particularly when such lies lead to thousands of deaths. I still haven't forgotten a picture I saw of a ten year old boy whose head was smashed to pieces by a coalition bomb. That boy is dead because your president and our prime minister lied about Iraq having WMDs. Thats why people are upset, lies can kill.

[Steevo]

No envy Tony, that's your idea. Spite? That's against American power. And many were not supportive of America before Iraq. It was a blip right after 9/11 that began to fade with Afghanistan. And who was lied to, at least in the US? Bush stated the info given him. It was believed by a lot of people not willing to admit it now. And you know if you wanna talk about an unintended death as result of warfare go to the 'good' war with WWII. No comparison Tony - not to mention the mass graves and genocide from Saddam.

You're simply obsessed with wanting to paint this bad until the day you die. That's not good Tony.

Like I said on another occasion, as much as I want success there as it is essential for the fight against terror and the survival of the people of Iraq, and as much as hope and positive efforts to make it possible is necessary and will continue with troops from the Coalition, Iraq, and the Iraqi people... I look to the day of their taking complete control of their destiny with strength and liberty, to spite people like you.

[S Baker]

"S Baker, I take it you will be offering your services for auxiliary work in Iraq then? Or do you prefer to have brave soldiers dying for your anti-islamic crusade?"

I thought I made it clear, I am a US Army Officer, and I have been to Afghanistan twice, and I am going to Iraq in the spring. As far as dying? I live by the general Patton motto - you should look it up!

Please spare me the veiled cynicism in your post. The bloody borders of Islam is a well known Phenomenon, I couldn't make this crap up in a million years!

[S Baker]

"S Baker, I take it you will be offering your services for auxiliary work in Iraq then? Or do you prefer to have brave soldiers dying for your anti-islamic crusade?"

I thought I made it clear, I am a US Army Officer, and I have been to Afghanistan twice, and I am going to Iraq in the spring. As far as dying? I live by the general Patton motto - you should look it up!

Please spare me the veiled cynicism in your post. The bloody borders of Islam is a well known Phenomenon, I couldn't make this crap up in a million years!

[Tony Makara]

Steevo, I grant you that Saddam was a tyrant and won't be missed by anyone. The only thing I can say in Saddam's favour is that he died bravely facing the gallows. I can only imagine how Tony Blair would have reacted in similar circumstances! I too hope the people of Iraq will find peace and prosperity. However that cannot be imposed at the end of a gun. The coalition attack on Iraq was wrong and most of the world recognizes that, including many leading American politicians.

S Baker, if you are to serve in Iraq I hope you are even-handed with the Muslims out there, they are just people like you and me. Most Muslims are opposed to acts of violence. How do you see your tour of duty, to maintain order? or to fight Islamic's? Are you planning to set up a blog with photos and videos to give us a view of events from your perspective?

[Maduka]

Malcolm,

Why should the average American care about how the USA is regarded in Indonesia or anywhere else, including Britain.

Because the USA is not China. The US is not just interested in boosting an economy, but also advancing the cause of human freedom.

America has an Idea to sell (just like the Jihadis). Perception is important in selling an idea.

Because the United States is such a diverse place. American citizens have ties to every place on earth. There is no crisis, no war and no natural disaster that does not affect an American citizen in a deeply personal way.

We tend to forget that the International System (flawed as it may be) is largely an American invention. (Churchill wanted to continue with the British Empire, while Stalin wanted to build a new Soviet Empire).

Today, the International System is under threat from authoritarian powers such as Russia and China. This is the time to fully engage and not disengage from the World.

[Malcolm Dunn]

I don't suggest that the USA disengages from the world Maduka for all his faults Bill Clinton succeeded in making many friends for the USA around the globe whereas the current administration doesn't even bother to try. That is not to the benefit of the US or the world. My point is merely that if Edwards wants to convince Americans to vote for him quoting how well America is liked in Indonesia or Turkey is not the way to do it.

[Steevo]

"I too hope the people of Iraq will find peace and prosperity. However that cannot be imposed at the end of a gun. The coalition attack on Iraq was wrong and most of the world recognizes that, including many leading American politicians."

Tony, you in particular have to explain yourself with this. Frankly the bottom line with all your comments on Iraq is gut-ugly. I can't imagine any Iraqi who would follow these discussions believe that you actually had feelings for them to succeed, over and above feelings for America to lose. Otherwise, what are you doing? Look, its a huge afterthought after being pounded that you can even come out with a 'yeah I hope Iraqis can have freedom'. In a lot of ways I like you, I really do... but you have very, very deep hangups with American power going far beyond any sense of perspective and decency. You know, when Iraqis celebrate being free and coming together honoring their American liberators at the same time, to read people like you on the other side of the world and your obsession to the complete contrary is nothing short of astounding. It would've been weird and unimaginable a number of years ago. Even Iraqis say this. Frankly many of them have no illusions, they are convinced many in the free world don't care about their fate, if it even implies, George Bush's America has a part. That's terrible.

[Tony Makara]

Steevo, you ask what I am doing? Well, to begin with I didn't start this war and I was opposed to it right from the off. I watched with disbelieve as so many swallowed Colin Powell's circus stunt at the UN, providing shoddy and flimsy 'evidence' I again watched in disbelief as seasoned politicians on all sides bought into what was clearly an 'excuse' for George Bush to get even with a man who had wanted to assassinate his father.

I received a lot of stick from from family, friends and foe's for stating that I didn't believe Iraq had WMDs, and that America and the lickspittle Blair were looking for an excuse to attack Iraq, yet I didn't waver from my position because the whole case for war with Iraq stank from day one, nothing seemed right, and my gut instinct told me that I was right. Later I was proven to be right.

Steevo, the problem is that apologists for the war cannot accept that they were wrong and they have not got the decency to admit that they were duped by lies.

[Steevo]

Tony, this is all about you and it always has been. That's the only point.

[S_baker]

"S Baker, if you are to serve in Iraq I hope you are even-handed with the Muslims out there, they are just people like you and me."

That is where you are wrong, they are not like you and I, that doesn't mean I hate them, they are different and they think differently than I do as a person who grew up in the west.

"Most Muslims are opposed to acts of violence. You think? I read that a large majority of Muslims in Great Britain want Sharia law. Seems like a disconnect to me.

How do you see your tour of duty, to maintain order? or to fight Islamic's?

I am a US Soldier, I fight where I am told and I win where I fight...General Patton. As for me, I'll see what happens. LTCs don't normally lead close quarter operations.

Are you planning to set up a blog with photos and videos to give us a view of events from your perspective?

I already have a blog, but no pictures for now.

[Nevile]

“The Last Exorcism ,Heart breaking Movie "2010" With Full Of Horrorr n Thrilling Full Filled Vth Special Effects ,Which is Ready To Hit The Screen's clickhere check out the full information