CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
– POLITICS
Aug. 27, 2008 – 6:13 a.m.
Democrats Confront National Security Challenge by Trying to Broaden the Definition
By Josh Rogin, CQ Staff
Democrats will use Wednesday night to try once again to persuade voters they can protect the nation’s national security interests — a political hurdle that has tripped up their party for decades.
After seven years of war in Afghanistan and five in Iraq, an army of Democratic policy experts, activists, veterans and students have developed a plan to use the party convention to turn the national security debate to their advantage. Their plan is to reframe the issue, presenting a new strategy that looks beyond the Iraq war in pursuit of both U.S. and international objectives.
Obama’s campaign, while not coordinating directly with these groups, has a parallel plan to showcase his support among key security-minded constituencies, including Iraq veterans, military families, and retired flag officers who oppose Bush administration policies.
And he has a vice presidential candidate in Delaware Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. with extensive foreign policy credentials as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.
“Biden conveys this sense that we need to use all the elements of national power,” said Obama senior national security adviser Richard Danzig, Navy Secretary under President Bill Clinton.
The campaign and the policy groups plan to link the traditional definition of national security to the slowing economy and the global energy situation. In this way, they hope to underscore their argument that today’s world is more interconnected and codependent than Republican candidate John McCain might admit.
“In the 21st century, the threats we face are at least as dangerous and in some ways more complex than those we’ve confronted in the past,” said Susan Rice, Obama’s top foreign policy adviser, in a speech at the New America Foundation on Aug. 15, “By definition they require cooperative solutions . . . while working with our allies and coming together in effective partnerships.”
Advocating a return to a strategy centered around “sticks and carrots,” Danzig argued that the country needs the Democratic approach of focusing on diplomacy as a multiplier of military might and building consensus with allies to increase the effectiveness of that effort.
The key to winning that debate this fall will be to establish a sense of trust with voters by educating them on the positive history of a cooperative internationalist approach, said Danzig, who called the gap in public confidence in Democrats on security issues “astonishing.”
“We know how to do this better than the administration and we certainly know how to do it better than John McCain ,” he said.
Mission One: Avoid Kerry’s Mistakes
The first mission for Democrats will be to avoid the pitfalls that imperiled the national security reputation of Sen. John Kerry , D-Mass., when he ran for president as the party’s nominee in 2004.
This year, Democrats are painfully aware of what they acknowledge was Kerry’s inability to overcome Bush’s success at framing the national security debate. Despite Kerry’s combat service in Vietnam and calls for a new direction in the Iraq war, Bush successfully portrayed him as being inconsistent on the war while outside conservative groups challenged his war record.
Democrats Confront National Security Challenge by Trying to Broaden the Definition
This year, they won’t have a war record to fall back on: Neither Democratic candidate has served in the military.
Instead, Democrats are trying to capitalize on their holding the first convention to frame national security issues on their own terms. “Tough and smart” are the buzzwords that Democrats want voter to link to their national security identity in 2008, while trying to portray the Republican approach as “reckless and out of touch.”
For example, Obama’s senior staff points to the crisis between Russia and Georgia as a development that plays to two key Democratic messages, that Republican focus on Iraq has drawn attention away from other regions and that energy security and national security are one in the same.
At the convention, his campaign is trying to make the case that Obama’s initial call for calm without assigning blame, followed by stronger rhetoric as Russia escalated, represented the right blend of diplomatic leadership.
“He’s acting like a commander-in-chief by responding in a balanced way and adjusting as the situation moves along,” said Danzig, “Sen. McCain doesn’t help the situation by blustering a lot at the Russians without useful steps to take, and second by politicizing the issue.”
Such an approach is meant to reinforce the Democrats’ argument that their candidate is ready to handle national security issues.
“The basic idea is that you have to take national security head-on as a Democrat because you’ve got three decades of skepticism of Democrats on national security dating back to Vietnam,” said Matt Bennett, former communications director for retired Gen. Wesley Clark ‘s 2004 campaign and now a spokesman at Third Way, a progressive policy advocacy organization.
“There’s a real problem that has to be addressed, but there’s also a real opportunity because people have become so disillusioned with the Republican approach to security,” Bennett said.
Third Way has been training Democratic congressional candidates on how to talk about national security in public forums, with guidance from Rep. Jane Harman of California, who previously served as the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and now chairs the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment.
But politics still plays a role in who speaks for the party on national security, at least at the convention.
Absent from prominent roles on Securing America’s Future night are House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton and House Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes , both of whom endorsed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton , not Obama.
Mission Two: Go On the Offensive
Many experts add that Obama himself must be more aggressive in responding to Republican attacks and not hide behind generals who agree with his views.
Democrats Confront National Security Challenge by Trying to Broaden the Definition
“The mistake that the Kerry campaign made was to assume that his heroism in Vietnam and surrounding himself with military brass would be enough,” said Bennett. “What they failed to recognize was that Republicans will attack any Democrat as weak on defense regardless of the facts.”
Obama plans to showcase four main interest groups within the national security establishment: retired military flag officers, young Iraq war veterans, military family members, and senior defense-minded civilian officials.
On Aug. 27, convention organizers will hold a series of events focusing on veterans, culminating in a “salute to veterans” at Coors Field.
That night, speakers addressing the Securing America’s Future theme include Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry , former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.
An array of progressive policy organizations have been trying to bolster the campaign’s efforts with speeches, discussions, communications training sessions, and other educational experiences for delegates and party activists.
The Truman National Security Project, a progressive security-minded think tank, is holding a series of educational events, including some “Military 101” training sessions to educate civilians about basic military information, as well as sessions on messaging, soft power, and how to confront emerging nations such as China and India.
Experts also will link energy security to national security, pointing out the high price of oil and how it affects our ability to exert power on the international stage, said Rachel Kleinfeld, the Truman Project’s executive director.
“No longer is national security the separate, discrete issue it once was,” said Kleinfeld, “You need to connect it to the strength of the economy, the strength of morale at home, and many other issues.”
Kleinfeld said Kerry erred by falling back on national security paradigms of another generation. “In 2004, they tried a very old fashioned security message, and people in America could see their hearts weren’t in it,” she said.
“We need a whole new way of looking at it,” she added. “It’s a hard message to convey and I don’t think he’s succeeded yet. But if we can convey that there’s a better way to do that, Americans will believe us.”
Ready For Nuance?
Obama’s strategy gambles that voters are ready for what his supporters call a more nuanced discussion of national security that, they say, will eschew conventional wisdom and sound bites, even as they use sound bites to describe it.
Rice recently laid out the party platform’s national security priorities, which include ending U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq, defeating violent extremism, securing nuclear arsenals, refitting the military, rebuilding alliances, spreading democracy, pursuing energy security and confronting climate change.
Democrats Confront National Security Challenge by Trying to Broaden the Definition
“The whole theme of the platform and the whole message of Sen. Obama’s campaign is renewal, is looking forward,” said Rice, using one of those sound bites the campaign derides. “It does not assume that we can tackle 21st century challenges with 20th century tools or frames.”
Rice said the platform reflects unity in Democratic Party thinking and includes input and opinion from a broad spectrum of party members.
The platform advocates conditioning U.S. military aid to Pakistan, which now exceeds $10 billion since 2001, on greater government efforts to combat terrorism within Pakistan’s borders.
The platform also reaches out to moderate Muslims, pledging to hold the U.S. government to the same moral standards it preaches.
“To empower the forces of moderation, America must live up to our values; respect civil liberties, reject torture, and lead by example,” it reads.
On the issue of homeland security, the platform pledges Obama to fully implement the languishing recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, to distribute homeland security money according to risk, and to conduct regular reviews of national homeland security policy.
As president, Obama says he would push to limit the term of the Director of National Intelligence, arguing that would “depoliticize” the office. He also says he would urge Senate ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and a strengthening of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, agreements the Bush administration largely ignored.
Democrats also plan to defend their call for more diplomacy with Iran, in the belief they can sell that approach as the balanced but strong position.
“By going the extra diplomatic mile while keeping all options on the table, we make it more likely that the rest of the world will stand with us to increase pressure on Iran if diplomacy is failing,” the party’s platform states.
According to the platform, Obama supports allowing gay soldiers to serve openly and would rein in contractors on the battlefield.
Already Obama initiatives have advanced the national security debate by giving policy experts the cover they need to advance those positions, argues Steve Coll, president of the New America Foundation.
For example, Obama’s argument that Iraq was a distraction and that a redeployment of U.S. forces is needed has prompted military and strategic planners to move forward with the planning for that redeployment, Coll said.
”The ideas and framework of a prospective Obama presidency is already shaping the conduct of the American permanent national security bureaucracy,” said Coll.
Comments
Good thoughts, but they only flesh out what turned out not to work in 2004. National security, as practiced at election time, does not lend itself to a nuanced approach. National security is the GOP's greatest perceived strength. Why not take the Roveian approach and attack the opponent's strengths? Don't say "we'll do better", but instead shred them for their own incompetent foolishness. Hard-hitting examples (e.g., Blackwater, failure to inspect shipping) will not be hard to find.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: