Fukuyama on US Foreign Policy

[Klinglerware]

Did any of you read the Francis Fukuyama op-ed in the NYTimes from a couple of days ago? For those of you who know little about the neo-conservative movement, Fukuyama is among the most well-known of the neocon intellectuals.

His op-ed gives a very sobering analysis of US FP in Iraq, and is a bit critical of the administration. He also raises an interesting point highlighting the tenuousness of the cooperation between two very different camps within the republican party: the intellectual neo-conservatives (that really have no base of their own) vs the more socially-conservative republicans that make up much of the party base.

I don't follow the goings on in the neocon movement, so I was a little surprised that Fukuyama would speak out against the administration, which is of course full of his fellow neo-conservative policy thinkers. I would assume that there must have been a rift between an intellectual purist like Fukuyama, versus some of the administration neocons, who probably had to alter their vision a little bit due to political considerations/real world feasibility/etc.


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/31/op...1fukuyama.html

[QuikSand]

I thought it was a very focused piece - and I don't have much of any argument with what he's saying. Fukuyama is a pretty engaging guy and can get irascible, but I pretty much buy his step by step logic here every step of the way.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Bill Crystol (another high profile neocon) has been very harsh on the Iraq intervention for some time now. The more the mission struggles, the more the neocons are likely to split with the administration. If the Iraq mission fails, they can reconcile it one of two ways: 1) the neocon philosophy is flawed and didn't work in Iraq, 2) the theory is great, but the administration f-ed it up. I think (2) is much more appealing to them.

[QuikSand]

*shuddering as I enter what could turn into another prototypical FOFC partisan debacle*

But the critical leap is from Al Quaeda to Iraq. As I understand it, the neocon view on the Middle East has been that it's a row of dominoes waiting to fall, and that a breach allowing democracy and freedom would eventually win over the people of that region. (With Iraq being the target, really ever since the bungled ending to Gulf War 1991 and the attempted assassination of Bush 41) It's a noble goal, by most any standard, even if you don't think it's practical.

What I find a little surprising is Fukuyama's basic dismissal of any real connection justifying making that leap. Most of the neocon pompon crowd had basically embraced the Iraq invasion on any number of grounds, and have rejected any suggestion that it was inappropriate or premature. Here, I feel Fukuyama is basically admitting the former, and that's what surprises me the most.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

*shuddering as I enter what could turn into another prototypical FOFC partisan debacle*

I hope not. That was not my intent.

I am fascinated by the role the neo-conservative movement has on contemporary US foreing policy, especially under a republican administration. Essentially, neo-conservatism has quite a few "soft", idea-based conceptions of foreign policy. It actually has a lot more in common with "liberal" views of International Relations, where you work to make the world a better place, as appropriate. It's pretty different than the traditional realpolitik (e.g., Kissinger's view of the world), where you base your decision making primarily on cost-benefit power considerations.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

I hope not. That was not my intent.

I am fascinated by the role the neo-conservative movement has on contemporary US foreing policy, especially under a republican administration. Essentially, neo-conservatism has quite a few "soft", idea-based conceptions of foreign policy. It actually has a lot more in common with "liberal" views of International Relations, where you work to make the world a better place, as appropriate. It's pretty different than the traditional realpolitik (e.g., Kissinger's view of the world), where you base your decision making primarily on cost-benefit power considerations.

There is certainly a sector of conservatives who oppose the Bush crew and what they're doing to the country. Especially their lack of fiscal restraint and insistence on empire building.

[NoMyths]

A fine piece, and thanks for posting it.

[Dutch]

Republicans generally have a good ammount of freedom in sharing their opposing viewpoints and the open dialogue enhances good decision making within the party.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by -Mojo Jojo-

Bill Crystol (another high profile neocon) has been very harsh on the Iraq intervention for some time now. The more the mission struggles, the more the neocons are likely to split with the administration. If the Iraq mission fails, they can reconcile it one of two ways: 1) the neocon philosophy is flawed and didn't work in Iraq, 2) the theory is great, but the administration f-ed it up. I think (2) is much more appealing to them.

Very interesting points.

[Leonidas]

Wonder what he thinks about the "interesting' philosophy of ridiculous deficit spending the neo-cons have that strikes hard against traditional conservative thinking.

[Jesse_Ewiak]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Republicans generally have a good ammount of freedom in sharing their opposing viewpoints and the open dialogue enhances good decision making within the party.

Ask Tom 'The Hammer' DeLay about that one, Dutch. Whether he believe in an 'open dialogue.'

Or the congressman from Michigan who was told the RNC would run a primary campaign against his son unless he voted for the Medicare bill.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Jesse_Ewiak

Ask Tom 'The Hammer' DeLay about that one, Dutch. Whether he believe in an 'open dialogue.'

Or the congressman from Michigan who was told the RNC would run a primary campaign against his son unless he voted for the Medicare bill.

Oh, sorry, I must've been mistaken. I'll let you left-wingers figure out how this guy slipped under the "Republican Propaganda Machine's Radar".

[ice4277]

Originally Posted by -Mojo Jojo-

Bill Crystol

Loved him in that cowboy movie with Jack Palance.
















Oh.