Former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher died Monday. She was 87. The Iron Lady served 11 1/2 terms in office, making her the longest-serving British prime minister of the 20th century. As with other transformational leaders, Thatcher had both devoted fans and harsh critics. “For admirers, Thatcher was a savior who rescued Britain from ruin and laid the groundwork for an extraordinary economic renaissance,” Associated Press reported. “For critics, she was a heartless tyrant who ushered in an era of greed that kicked the weak out onto the streets and let the rich become filthy rich.”
The Boston Globe did an autopsy of the U.S. Senate’s December vote failing to ratify an international treaty on the rights of individuals with disabilities – a measure championed by former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole, who appeared in the chamber in a wheelchair for the vote. “The deepest wound – some considered it betrayal – came from a Republican senator from Dole’s home state of Kansas. That senator, Jerry Moran (in photo), had announced he supported the treaty and would be ‘standing up for the rights of those with disabilities,’” the Globe noted. Asked why he voted against it, Moran told the Globe: “I tried to help (the treaty) come to the floor, and had never made a conclusion as to whether I was for or against it, and concluded that it was a bad idea to have the United Nations involved in this.” Dole told the Globe: “The home-schoolers thought the U.N. would be involved in how they dealt with their children. I don’t know how they got there, but once the stampede starts, they notify their leaders to start ringing the phones, sending the e-mails. It’s really effective.”
Last year, on Sept. 11, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got that “3 a.m. phone call.” Her failure to answer leaves a permanent black mark on her record. Clinton’s blindness to the magnitude of the department’s failure regarding the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi was on display in her recent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Her testimony revealed a leader unapologetic for her failure to act or understand the threat. Worse, she showed no real interest in learning from the incident. Taking “responsibility” for the attack means nothing without follow-up. It appears that the only thing she hopes to learn from the experience is that if you play nice with the press and with Congress, you can suffer no consequences for abject failure. That said, the bumbling of Benghazi and the indifference toward learning from the disaster cannot be erased from reality. The ghosts of Benghazi will always follow Clinton. – James Jay Carafano, Heritage Foundation
It’s possible that Hillary Clinton may decide not to run for president in 2016, but there is very little reason to believe such a decision would be a result of her handling of the Benghazi attacks. According to a recent Wall Street Journal poll, Clinton leaves her post as secretary of state with an eye-popping 69 percent approval rating. If Clinton’s approval numbers were this high during a month in which she endured a hostile congressional grilling over Benghazi, there is no reason to expect that the incident is going to plague her in any meaningful way. Clinton’s response to Benghazi is another factor working in her favor. She has not dodged the issue, and she has demonstrated a willingness to accept responsibility for mistakes that were made and to work to fix the problems that have been identified. – Jim Cottrill, Santa Clara University
“A reality has become too obvious for the world’s dazed inhabitants not to notice: The greatest threat to the upward arc of human progress is the collapse of public policymaking. That is the biggest cliff of all,” Daniel Henninger wrote in the Wall Street Journal. He said that “government, for the past 80 years or so, has seen its purpose as mainly to ‘respond’ to society’s failures the moment they occur or whenever they are imagined.” But the problem with governments around the world today, he wrote, “is that its advocates are enacting policies that do damage or don’t work.”
Though polling after Monday night’s presidential debate showed President Obama as the clear winner, the debate is unlikely to make a significant difference in the election. An average of “snap polls” of debate viewers had Obama winning by some 17 percentage points (including a 30-point win in a CBS News poll). But the topic of the debate – foreign policy – is not a priority for most voters, and Mitt Romney was able to meet the basic test of the debate: appearing as a credible commander in chief.
“The purpose of Wednesday’s hearing of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee was to examine security lapses that led to the killing in Benghazi last month of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others. But in doing so, the lawmakers reminded us why ‘congressional intelligence’ is an oxymoron,” wrote Dana Milbank of the Washington Post. “Through their outbursts, cryptic language and boneheaded questioning of State Department officials, the committee members left little doubt that one of the two compounds at which the Americans were killed, described by the administration as a ‘consulate’ and a nearby ‘annex,’ was a CIA base. They did this, helpfully, in a televised public hearing.”
Kansas Sens. Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran released aptly somber, nonpolitical statements after the killings of U.S. diplomats in Libya. Then there was U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Wichita, whose Thursday statement started out similarly but veered into shameless and tone-deaf partisan rhetoric that linked the attacks to the president’s “Carter-like” lack of “resolve and leadership.” Pompeo said: “The lessons from 1979 have been lost on this administration. It is not difficult to understand that our enemies see a green light to attack us when American leaders apologize and express moral equivalence between those who obey the rule of law and those who plot to destroy our country.” He also called Obama’s public response to the attacks “feckless,” finding the president insufficiently tough on the Egyptian government. “It is clearer today than ever before that the president’s foreign policy is fraught with failed leadership. Our military, Foreign Service and nation deserve better,” Pompeo concluded. Pompeo’s feelings about Obama are no secret, but his timing and tone were off and unproductive.
In the wake of the murder of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and as other U.S. embassies have been targeted for protests and violence, many pundits have eagerly jumped on Mitt Romney – specifically his campaign’s misinformed statement Tuesday night that “the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” The Los Angeles Times editorialized that the GOP presidential nominee was “capitalizing on the attack to shore up his dubious campaign narrative that Obama is soft on radical Islam and apologetic about American values. It’s an outrageous exercise in opportunism.” The New York Times’ Gail Collins said Romney “went for a cheap attack at a time when any calm, mature adult would have waited and opted for at least a brief show of national unity.” President Obama even joined in, saying Romney “seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later.” Of course, criticizing Romney’s remarks, however ill-considered, is easier than debating what to do about the spreading unrest.
How tragic that the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens (in photo), and three staff members were killed Tuesday as the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was overwhelmed by a mob upset about an obscure film that ridicules the Prophet Muhammad. The violence made Stevens the first U.S. ambassador to die in the line of duty in 33 years. The U.S. Embassy in Cairo also has been targeted by protesters. Boston Globe columnist Farah Stockman watched the trailer on YouTube believed to have inspired the violence, for a movie credited to California real-estate developer Sam Bacile. She found it hard to believe something that “felt like a ‘Saturday Night Live’ spoof” with “terrible acting” and “weird cardboard-looking desert backdrops” could lead to the death of Stevens, a friend of a friend. “The blame for Chris’ death rests squarely with the mob who attacked our embassy. Their actions are despicable, and perhaps were incited by long-standing enemies of the United States. Muslims who are angry at how their religion has been portrayed must stop responding in violent ways that perpetrate the idea of Islam as a dangerous faith,” Stockman wrote. “But shouldn’t people who knowingly incite violence against the United States – as a crude, thinly-veiled publicity stunt – also be held accountable?”
Russia, the world’s ninth-largest economy, will open its doors to greater trade when it joins the World Trade Organization this summer. This could be a tremendous opportunity to sell more U.S. goods and services to Russia’s 142 million people. But U.S. companies won’t be able to take full advantage of Russia’s new open markets or the dispute resolution system unless Congress passes legislation establishing what’s known as Permanent Normal Trade Relations. This is the same status the United States routinely authorizes with other countries joining the WTO to ensure consistent and fair trade relations. The problem is that some believe PNTR should be withheld to pressure Russia to address human rights and foreign policy issues. Unfortunately, this approach is based on the mistaken notion that Russia would somehow be penalized if Congress fails to approve the legislation needed to promote greater U.S. trade with Russia. In reality, congressional inaction would only penalize U.S. companies and their employees by depriving them of improved access to Russia’s markets. – Douglas R. Oberhelman, Caterpillar Inc.
President Obama wants Congress to remove most restrictions on trade with Russia. Like so many of Obama’s initiatives, his latest move seems naive because Russia will get all the benefits of free trade in the U.S. market, but American companies may have to wait on Russian strongman Vladimir Putin (in photo) to remove Russia’s harrowing trade barriers. Moreover, Obama cannot ignore the importance of human rights that Americans hold dear at home and expect to see respected abroad. Business groups forever dream of huge exports to Russia. Is that realistic? Hardly. Just the other day, Putin told the world he wants vastly expanded trade with China. Obama, who wants Russia in the World Trade Organization without a quid pro quo, apparently wants to believe that the audacity of hope will turn Putin into an honest player on the world stage. – Bogdan Kipling
Nuclear bombs and other weapons of mass destruction are hard to acquire. As he highlighted David Ignatius’ “Bloodmoney: A Novel of Espionage,” the Atlantic’s Steve Clemons asked a worrisome question: What happens when America’s enemies get drones? “While the U.S. is today preparing to further expand its drone force and as of late arm Italian drones, Iran is now trying to develop its own drones. So too it seems China and Russia,” Clemons wrote. “The question that President Obama, who has admitted direct, routinized involvement in creating the drone ‘kill list,’ should ponder is what will happen as the barriers to entry on drone technology fall enough so that an adversary’s drones can be deployed against U.S. and allied forces and interests.”
The risks and uncertainties in the Arab Spring uprisings have led some U.S. leaders to argue that we might be better off supporting authoritarian rulers in order to maintain stability in the Middle East. “But in the long run, this foreign policy approach is not realistic,” former President George W. Bush wrote in a Wall Street Journal commentary. “It is not within the power of America to indefinitely preserve the old order, which is inherently unstable.” Bush added: “America does not get to choose if a freedom revolution should begin or end in the Middle East or elsewhere. It only gets to choose what side it is on.”
As Syrian dictator Bashar Assad continues his slaughter, the issue is not whether more forceful U.S. action to stop him is risk-free. The issue, instead, is how the risks and potential rewards of more forceful U.S. action to stop Assad’s slaughter stack up against those of a continued U.S. reliance on sanctions and diplomacy that offer few prospects of success. Military action has a proven track record. In the Balkans in the 1990s and Libya last year, the United States and its allies demonstrated that we can, in fact, stop a slaughter with little risk to U.S. forces. With each passing day, Assad grows stronger, more emboldened and more likely to survive. Only a U.S.-led effort can stop the slaughter and alter the outcome of this horrific disaster. – Lawrence J. Haas, American Foreign Policy Council
The concept of “Responsibility to Protect” – the idea of recent origin that the international community should protect a population from its own government – was invoked in Libya. But that concept includes one critical criterion. Any proposed action holds the prospect of bringing more good than the harm that inevitably accompanies military action. The Syrian resistance is not unified. Its goals apart from overthrowing Assad are unclear. Giving them the wherewithal to fight better may just turn what we now see into full-scale civil war in which the resistance elements might still be at a disadvantage militarily. Difficult as it may be to bring the parties together, negotiations for a political transition offer the best hope. Once the parties realize that the standoff will not end to anyone’s advantage, they may, however reluctantly, be willing to talk. – John B. Quigley, Ohio State University
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is getting a surprising amount of positive attention these days, via the “Texts from Hillary” meme and otherwise. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates added his applause in an essay as part of Time’s list of “The 100 Most Influential People in the World,” describing Clinton as tough, indefatigable, patient, smart and knowledgeable and calling her an “idealistic realist and a superb secretary of state.” Gates, a native Wichitan who is now chancellor of the College of William and Mary, said Clinton “has made a singular contribution to strengthening this country’s relationships with allies, partners and friends; rallying other countries to join us in dealing with challenges to the global order, from Libya and Iran to the South China Sea; and reaching out to people in scores of countries to demonstrate that America cares about them.” Meanwhile, Gates is still getting recognition. He will be the first individual to receive an honorary doctorate degree from Kansas State University when he speaks at the university’s graduate school commencement on May 11.
The recent rise of Islamic movements in Egypt, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere are generating profound new challenges for the United States. These groups, which include the Muslim Brotherhood and Nour Party in Egypt and al-Qaida-inspired jihadists in Yemen and Libya, are anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, anti-women, anti-Western and, indeed, anti-modern. At their most extreme, they seek to restore the region and convert the world to seventh-century life during the time of the Prophet Muhammad. The ascendancy of Islamic forces, whether at the ballot box or on the battlefield, raises serious questions about whether they would scrap such key building blocks of regional stability as the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and create more safe havens in the region for anti-Western terrorists. – Lawrence J. Haas, American Foreign Policy Council
Islamic political parties are assuming roles in the new order in Arab countries. Will these parties hurt American interests in the region? Depends on what you consider to be our interests. Tunisia, the country where the political change began in late 2010, seems to be doing quite well so far. Islamists are part of the political process there, but Tunisia elected as president a secular candidate who seems to enjoy general support. If by American interests in the Middle East one means access to oil, there is probably no problem. Whoever has oil needs to sell it. Saudi Arabia is as Islamic as it gets, and it is happy to cash our checks. – John B. Quigley, Ohio State University
Former Wichita congressman Dan Glickman is among those noting how President Bush’s work against AIDS and malaria is paying off. Through the establishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, Bush helped deliver lifesaving treatment and support to millions of children and adults around the globe. Glickman, now chairman of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, wrote: “If a lifelong Democrat can step forward to praise a conservative Republican president for his extraordinary accomplishments in global development, hopefully my colleagues — of both political parties — will see that fighting HIV/AIDS and malaria, as well as helping developing countries modernize their economies, agricultural systems and political structures, is something we can all agree protects American interests and values.”
When you ask Americans where to cut federal spending, many point first to foreign aid. But a Roll Call commentary co-written by former Wichita congressman Dan Glickman (in photo) noted that diplomatic and development programs represent only 1 percent of overall federal spending and, among other benefits, serve national security and help connect American businesses to global markets: “Disproportionately deep cuts now would also reverse efforts by both the Bush and Obama administrations to make our foreign assistance programs more effective and results-driven.”
Nice as it would have been to see Moammar Gadhafi brought to justice in court, it’s hard to feel regret over the news that the Libyan dictator was killed today as rebels finally took control of his hometown of Sirte. After 42 years of his brutal rule and an eight-month uprising, Libya is finally free to pursue a stable new government of the people. For the U.S., the goal now becomes supporting Libya’s Transitional National Council while winding down the NATO presence in the country. As of Sept. 30, the cost of U.S. military operations in Libya was $1.1 billion.
Though progress is coming much, much too slowly, it is good that Saudi Arabia is starting to grant more rights to women. This week the kingdom announced that women would be able to vote and run as candidates in local elections — though not until 2015. But the historic reform was undermined the next day when a Saudi court sentenced a woman to 10 lashes for driving a car. Thank goodness King Abdullah reportedly has revoked the sentence — though women still aren’t allowed to drive in the country.
Good for Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., for pushing for the approval of trade agreements with South Korea, Panama and Colombia. The agreements were reached during the Bush administration but have been held up by labor concerns and by the GOP’s defunding of a program that helps workers and companies negatively affected by trade deals. But as Roberts noted last week, the delay is causing U.S. businesses and producers to lose out. “Other countries are not waiting for the U.S. to get into the game,” he said. “They are enacting trade agreements without the United States. It is not without consequences. For the folks on the farm, export markets are critical to their bottom line.” The Kansas Farm Bureau estimates that the three agreements would increase total direct exports by $129.5 million for Kansas agriculture producers. Kansas planemakers also stand to benefit from the agreements. “The bottom line,” Roberts said, “is U.S. companies must be able to compete in foreign markets to survive and grow.”
Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., remains out front against the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which aims to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” In a Washington Times commentary, Moran wrote, “I am gravely concerned this treaty will infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of American gun owners and will be used by other countries that do not share our freedoms to wrongly place the burden of controlling international crime and terrorism on law-abiding American citizens.” In any case, ratification seems unlikely — it would take two-thirds support from the U.S. Senate.
After having harshly criticized President Obama for providing some military support to the Libyan rebels, GOP presidential candidates are struggling to respond to the good news about the rebels sweeping into Tripoli, the New York Times reported. Mitt Romney, who last month accused Obama of “mission muddle” for supporting efforts to remove Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi (in photo), said this week that “the world celebrates the idea of getting rid of Gadhafi.” Jon Huntsman, who called the intervention a mistake, said Monday that Gadhafi’s defeat “is a step toward openness, democracy and human rights for a people who greatly deserve it.”
Last Friday marked 40 years since President Nixon asked Congress for $155 million to launch a war on drugs. “Seven presidents later, the war grinds on,” columnist Leonard Pitts wrote. “And if it has made even a dent in drug use, you could not prove it by me — nor, I would wager, by most observers. The Global Commission on Drug Policy, a group of international leaders including Kofi Annan, the former secretary-general of the United Nations, issued a report this month that begins with this unambiguous declaration: ‘The global war on drugs has failed.’”
A loss of bipartisanship threatens U.S. foreign policy, outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on “Fox News Sunday.” Gates said: “When we have been successful in national security and foreign affairs, it has been because there has been bipartisan support. . . . That’s what happened through nine presidencies and the Cold War that led to our success, because no major international problem can be solved on one president’s watch.” When asked what can be done to prevent partisanship from bleeding into foreign policy and national security, Gates responded: “I’m not sure what can be done, quite frankly.” He has tried to foster a civil dialogue between the executive branch and the Congress. “When individuals make this effort,” Gates said, “they can make headway.”
From a New York Times article about Pakistan arresting some of the CIA informants who helped us track down Osama bin Laden: “Some in Washington see the arrests as illustrative of the disconnect between Pakistani and American priorities at a time when they are supposed to be allies in the fight against al-Qaida — instead of hunting down the support network that allowed bin Laden to live comfortably for years, the Pakistani authorities are arresting those who assisted in the raid that killed the world’s most wanted man.”
Former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher died Monday. She was 87. The Iron Lady served 11 1/2 terms in office, making her the longest-serving British prime minister of the 20th century. As with other transformational leaders, Thatcher had both devoted fans and harsh critics. “For admirers, Thatcher was a savior who rescued Britain from ruin and laid the groundwork for an extraordinary economic renaissance,” Associated Press reported. “For critics, she was a heartless tyrant who ushered in an era of greed that kicked the weak out onto the streets and let the rich become filthy rich.”
