American Legion Speech Reflects McCain’s Neocon Influences

PHOENIX, Ariz. — During Sen. John McCain’s speech to the American Legion national convention here this morning, McCain unveiled a new approach for criticizing Sen. Barack Obama on foreign policy. Rather than paint Obama simply as inexperienced, as he has many times, McCain hammered the presumed Democratic nominee for being overconfident in himself, while being insufficiently confident in American power. From McCain’s prepared remarks:

There are those who say that our day as the free world’s leader has passed, that our moment is waning. They point to the anti-Americanism that is sometimes heard in Europe and elsewhere, and take this as a sign that America no longer has the strength or the moral credibility to lead. The criticisms tend to pass or quiet down when global threats and dangers appear. In times of trouble, free nations of the world still look to America for leadership, because they know the strength of America remains the greatest force for good on this earth.

My opponent had the chance to express such confidence in America, when he delivered a much anticipated address in Berlin. He was the picture of confidence, in some ways. But confidence in oneself and confidence in one’s country are not the same. And in that speech, Senator Obama left an important point unclear. He suggested that the end of the Cold War proved that there was, “no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.” Now I missed a few years of the Cold War, as the guest of one of our adversaries, but as I recall the world was deeply divided during the Cold War — between the side of freedom and the side of tyranny. The Cold War ended not because the world stood “as one,” but because the great democracies came together, bound together by sustained and decisive American leadership.

Aside from McCain’s reference to his prisoner of war experience — which he supposedly doesn’t like to talk about — and his comment about Obama — which the Obama campaign is decrying as an attack on the Illinois senator’s patriotism — McCain’s speech today is noteworthy because it explicitly reflects the neoconservative view of America’s role in the world for which some of McCain’s most prominent advisers are known. It’s no secret that McCain’s team of foreign policy advisers includes high-profile Neocons Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan and Randy Scheunemann, all of whom signed on to the Project for a New American Century, which advocates a muscular, aggressive American foreign policy that uses America’s military strength to advance values like democracy and justice in other countries.

For the sake of our own security, and the defense of our values in the affairs of the world, American leadership is critical. While we have our share of critics around the world, when people in the oppressed nations of the world need support, and solidarity, and hope, they look to America. When they talk about our country, it is not with distrust or disdain, but with respect and affection. They do not resent or resist America’s democratic influence in the world — they thank God for it.

Just days after the Russian invasion of Georgia, Senator Obama had this to say about the crisis: “We’ve got to send a clear message to Russia and unify our allies. They can’t charge into other countries. Of course it helps if we are leading by example on that point.” End of quote. I guess we are left to figure out the rest for ourselves. It’s unlikely he was alluding to Afghanistan, the nation we liberated after 9/11, and continue to help despite Russian complaints about our related deployments in Central Asia. And he probably didn’t have Kosovo in mind either — although Russia didn’t care much for that military action, either. We and our NATO allies had to end the Serbian slaughter of civilians in Kosovo without UN approval, because the Russians blocked the effort in the Security Council.

If I catch Senator Obama’s drift, then, our failure to “lead by example” was the liberation of Iraq. And if he really thinks that, by liberating Iraq from a dangerous tyrant, America somehow set a bad example that invited Russia to invade a small, peaceful, and democratic nation, then he should state it outright — because that is a debate I welcome.

In the end, confusion about such questions only invites more trouble, violence, and aggression. To promote stability and peace, America must stand firmly on the side of freedom and justice. The next president must bring to office a clear-eyed view of our nation’s role in the world, as the defender of the oppressed and a force for peace.

In today’s speech McCain resurrects the language of “liberation” of Iraq and Afghanistan — a favorable term preferred by many who advocated the invasion of Iraq. Though McCain discusses both conflicts at just about every campaign event at which he appears, I can’t recall him talking about them in this way in the last couple of months. In the last paragraph, “Confusion about such questions only invites more trouble, violence and aggression” sounds strikingly familiar to the statements of Donald Rumsfeld — another Neoconservative — first in 1984 and then again in 2001 in his testimony to the 9/11 commission, that “weakness invites aggression.”

Perhaps this shift in rhetoric reflects a new McCain campaign strategy, now that Obama has chosen Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate. Obama’s go-to answer for questions of foreign policy is to call for more international cooperation. The New York Times‘ recently described Biden — the current chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee — as a like-minded partner to Obama:

Mr. Biden is widely seen as a liberal-minded internationalist. He has emphasized the need for diplomacy but has been prepared at times to back it with the threat of force. An early advocate of military action to quell the ethnic fighting in the Balkans, he has not been averse to American military intervention abroad. As the debates over Kosovo and later Iraq showed, he has been loath to give the United Nations a veto over American policy decisions. But he has also sought to ensure that the United States acted in concert with other nations.

Despite the fact that neoconservatism has a bruised reputation in light of the events of the last seven years, McCain may be preparing to contrast himself against his more liberal opponents as a candidate who will not put America’s security in the hands of international organizations. His tough rhetoric on Russia of late — which as Reason’s Matt Welch, author of the McCain book “Myth of a Maverick”, notes is consistent with McCain’s historical reactions to many international crises — indicates he favors maintaining an aggressive foreign policy. If this is the case, it appears that, at least in this respect, a McCain administration may very well mirror that of his predecessor.