Image via WikipediaYes, Nixon was a crook, no question about it. And I'm a conservative, and President Nixon definitely wasn't. (Disagree? We can debate that. He was clearly more liberal than his Democrat opponent Kennedy). But along with his sidekick Henry Kissinger, he had an encompassing, completely thought out, foreign policy.
Now, many conservatives didn't care for his policy - it was far too realpolitik for their convictions. And many if not most hated it, because it was a too confrontational to communism. I loved it then, and I love it more now. Look at successive administrations. Ford wasn't in long enough to matter. Carter was completely taken aback when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and never recovered his bearings. Regan made some steps in the right direction and had a brilliant plan vis a vis the Soviets, but couldn't develop a theory for the rest of the world. Bush the elder was on course, I believe, to a comprehensive world policy, but became a one-term President. Clinton may have been the most qualified domestic policy President ever, but seemed largely disinterested in foreign policy, and, let's face it, Madeline Albright was generally clueless. Bush the younger lacked his father's wide-ranging international experience (e.g. CIA, diplomat) and, tied up with terrorism, two wars and debt crisis, didn't really create a policy.
That brings us to the current administration. Even members of President Obama's own party can't explain, much less support, our _______ (whatever you want to call it) in Libya. And what on earth triggered the decision to sell some oil from the strategic reserve? While I don't think for a minute that Hillary Clinton is Henry Kissinger, I do think she is reasonably talented. While our 10 year string of financial profligacy has badly reduced our power and influence, surely we can do far better than this.
I miss the Nixon administration.
Comments