Republicans tougher on national security?

January 6, 2010 by Elan Journo

In the wake of the national security debacle of the Christmas Day attempted bombing of Northwest Flight 253, the Obama administration is being justifiably pummeled — and the Republicans are piling on with zeal.

GOP opinion leaders such as former Vice President Dick Cheney have seized on the attack to question President Barack Obama’s grasp of foreign affairs. Republican Party officials have sent fund-raising appeals that take aim at Mr. Obama’s response to the episode.

The Republicans’ goal, the WSJ reports,  is to “regain [their] traditional advantages on security issues.”

Regain it? When have Republicans deserved that reputation? Definitely not during the eight years of George W. Bush.

In the wake of 9/11 Bush’s administration used some heated rhetoric and came to be widely reviled/admired for its supposedly tough foreign policy. But in reality that reputation was unwarranted. Like Obama today, Bush failed to recognize the nature of the enemy — what I call the Islamic totalitarian movement. Bush’s policy of democracy-promotion in the Middle East worked to empower assorted members of that movement, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and Iranian-backed groups in Iraq. (You can read more about this in my book.)

What have Republicans stood for lately that might be construed as distinguishing them fundamentally from Obama’s foreign policy?

On Afghanistan, a serious challenge would point to the self-crippled war policy that (I’ve argued) hamstrung our military efforts there. Yet many GOPers challenged Obama not on the goal or means, nor on the reason for the fiasco (a perceived lack of troops and aid) –  but rather on the number of troops that would be sent. Then, once he announced his decision, they went along with it.

Or take Iran: the view practically everyone now holds is that we need to use a “carrot-and-stick” approach to nudge Iran into ending its nuclear program. The dispute (if it can be called a dispute)  is over how to calibrate the right combination of carrots and sticks. The president has spent the last year trying to butter up the murderous theocrats in Tehran (predictably, to no avail), while Republicans carp that the time for sanctions is overdue. This is not a deep divide, but a disagreement over how to implement a policy that has failed repeatedly (see North Korea, now a nuclear power).

To deserve the reputation as the party of national defense, Republicans must take seriously the responsibility of defining and advocating a foreign policy that protects our freedom and lives. They have yet to do so.

flickr/Alex Barth