Kerry pitches his global view
In the first of a series of campaign speeches, Kerry seeks to sharpen foreign-policy differences with Bush.
(Page 2 of 2)
Still, many analysts argue that the overall approach and tone Kerry would bring to US foreign policy would represent a striking contrast with Bush - and could lead to some substantially different results.
"Bush is part of the realist, realpolitik school of foreign policy, that first and foremost showcases America's force," says historian Douglas Brinkley. "Kerry is part of what they used to call the moralist or multilateral school of foreign affairs."
Often, realpolitik is the best approach, Mr. Brinkley adds: During the cold war, for example, both Kennedy and Reagan took tougher stands against the Soviet Union, that ultimately proved successful. "But it is not the best approach when you are trying to get countries to spend billions of dollars in building up a new democratic society."
Kerry's multilateral worldview can be traced to his background: The son of a diplomat, he went to boarding school in Switzerland, and spent time in cities like Paris and Bonn. In the US, his familiarity with European culture has been seen almost as a disadvantage - Republicans have joked that he "looks French," and mocked him in an Austin Powers-style spoof as an "international man of mystery."
But as the US burden in Iraq grows, Americans may increasingly see an advantage in a president who is comfortable negotiating with - and might have more of an opening among - foreign leaders.
Kerry supporters argue that many European nations actually want to get back on good terms with the US, but feel they can't negotiate with Bush because the political cost at home would be too high.
"I think we'd see a pretty palpable clearing of the air [under a Kerry presidency]," says Ted Widmer, a former National Security Council speechwriter and a professor at Washington College. "And I think there could be some quick steps taken that would build on that."
But to critics, Kerry's willingness to work through multilateral institutions is an outdated approach, as the US faces new, fast-growing threats like terrorism. "Diplomacy by nature is slow and laborious," says Michael Franc, vice president for government relations at the Heritage Foundation. "The nature of the [terrorist] threat is so much more instantaneous - it requires more aggressive ... action."
In some ways, friends and advisors admit, Kerry's approach to diplomacy would probably be less chummy than predecessors such as former President Clinton, who was known for his charisma - or even than Bush, who has made a hallmark of bringing foreign leaders to his ranch (and bestowing nicknames on them). "John is not a towel-snapper," says Winer.
But they say he's also not likely to be taken in by leaders with agendas - bringing a healthy skepticism to his dealings dating back to days as a prosecutor and times he headed Senate investigations.
"John has seen too much double-dealing and people with agendas to accept at face value what he's presented with," says John Mattes, a former aide who worked with Kerry on several Senate investigations.
Page:
1 | 2




