Matthew Yglesias (June 18, 2008) - Working Group (Foreign Policy)

Woo-hoo! Mr. "Winnie the Pooh is a fundamental text of foreign policy" makes the cut. Every time you think the Obama campaign can't get any more mock-able, it does!

Posted by Al | June 18, 2008 10:27 AM

I certainly hope that's a list released only to placate the Broders and Friedmans of the world, and not any sort of guide to what an eventual Obama foreign policy will be like. I've seen more inspiring lists after a trip to the doctor.

Posted by ChuckE | June 18, 2008 10:30 AM

Looks like the Israel bashers Malley and Brzezinski have been thrown under the bus, at least until after the election.

Posted by SLC | June 18, 2008 10:31 AM

I believe that's called Change You Can Xerox! I like most of the people on the list, to the extent that I know anything about them, but it's a useful corrective to those who think an Obama administration would rip out the pages and start the book anew.

Posted by Rich | June 18, 2008 10:32 AM

it's a useful corrective to those who think an Obama administration would rip out the pages ...

Of Clinton's book, or Bush's?
.

Posted by Grand Moff Texan | June 18, 2008 10:36 AM

Any word on Samantha Power?

Posted by TDE | June 18, 2008 10:40 AM

There are a lot of Clinton people in that list . . . just an observation.

Posted by Pete | June 18, 2008 10:41 AM

Oy. I was reading the post and thought it was a joke MY was playing on us. But the punchline never came! Not all bad, of course, but....ew. Yeah, where's Samantha Power? And what is Albright doing there?!

Posted by jonnybutter | June 18, 2008 10:47 AM

I expect to be surprised by Obama. This didn't.

Posted by Judson | June 18, 2008 10:50 AM

I remember back during the 2000 election, a lot of people I knew justified voting for an inexperienced Bush because of the quality and sheer number of respected advisors he had. I question whether this is really a good idea or not again. Granted, the malice of the Bush Administration may have been responsible for its failings, but I think it's tainted the argument of 'experience by association' for a long time to come.

Posted by Jeremy | June 18, 2008 10:51 AM

FYI:

William Perry on North Korea

Posted by Justin | June 18, 2008 10:56 AM

Well, this list contains all of the very oldest and most experienced foreign policy hands in the Democratic Party. Boren, Albright, Christopher, Hamilton, Nunn - talk about the old guard. The announcement of this group seems designed to create the impression of gray, wrinkled, wizened, sober, experienced foreign policy stewardship surrounding Obama.

Depressingly, there is not a single innovative, controversial, outside-the-box thinker on this list. Where is the intellectual challenge and vitality? It appears the events of the past seven years, and the deep, systematic failure of the entire US foreign policy establishment during that time, have forced no substantive reevaluations of the broad direction of US foreign policy, have provoked no move away from complacent continuity with the past, and have not had the slightest influence on the thinking of government leaders.

Personally, I feel like all of the energy I put into thinking about and writing about foreign policy has been a failure, and an utter waste of time. Why even bother any more?

Posted by Dan Kervick | June 18, 2008 11:11 AM

I think Obama has receive his last contribution from me...with that list, he will be able to solict all the M.I.C./ "serious pundit" money he needs! "Jeruselem undivided"! In 2012 we will still be in Iraq and maybe Iran even if Obama is elected! "Change you can XEROX" is correct!

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 11:12 AM

What, no Ward Churchill or Mummia named to the group? You mean World Daily Net lied to me? Horrors!

Posted by Northern Observer | June 18, 2008 11:18 AM

Let's hope this is more about the campaign than the ultimate administration.

Posted by jonnybutter | June 18, 2008 11:20 AM

I'm not sure why people are acting surprised/disappointed. Former Clinton officials like Lake, Rice, Danzig, and Craig have long been among his top foreign policy advisors (Lake in particular goes back a long time with Obama), and after becoming the nominee he is now also adding some of the most experienced Democrats around to the list--but I wouldn't expect those additions to start changing Obama's stated goals and principles. Indeed, generally that list is consistent with several likely Obama foreign policy themes--much more aggressive diplomatic engagement, a greater focus on non-proliferation, more attention being paid to Africa, and so on.

Posted by DTM | June 18, 2008 11:20 AM

Let's hope this is more about the campaign than the ultimate administration.

Amen to that. This list seems to be constructed to maximize public name recognition, probably with an eye to shoring up the "inexperienced on foreign policy" defense. I sure as hell hope Obama doesn't plan to put these people in charge of the foreign policy apparatus.

Posted by J.B. | June 18, 2008 11:27 AM

I think this just might be an election "advisory" group, but I'm sure people like Danzig and Tony Lake will be major players in an Obama administration. However, I'd be on the look out for people like Sarah Sewall from Harvard who's done good work with the Army's counterinsurgency field manual; Colin Kahl from Georgetown; Michele Flournoy, Kurt Campbell, James Miller and others from the Center for a New American Security. These folks would be good candidates to fill slots on the NSC staff, policy planning at State, and other under secretary/deputy/assistant secretary positions at State and Defense.

Posted by murph | June 18, 2008 11:31 AM

By the way, Holder's presence on this list strikes me as likely to add fuel to the rumors he is a possible AG pick.

Posted by DTM | June 18, 2008 11:33 AM

DTM and murph are right - it's hardly all bad. But Albright is both a mediocrity and a thoughtless hawk. And Christopher? Why? These are two high-profile people who may not have as much sway as their high profile might suggest they would, but it's their very figurehead-ness that bothers me. I don't want to see Christopher on tv being his usual ineffectual self. I don't want Albright's foolish, sometimes callous, statements associated with the new administration.

Posted by jonnybutter | June 18, 2008 11:44 AM

I join with those who are not very enthusiastic about this list. Nunn?!? Albright?!? Christopher?!?! Ugh.

BUT,

Given how much institutional memory has been demolished over the past 8 years, I s'pose we need some of these old hands to help people remember what the diplomatic structure is supposed to look like.

Posted by Brautigan | June 18, 2008 11:50 AM

I notice that Wesley Clark seems conspicuously absent. I wonder if that means he's a contender for the VP slot. . .

Posted by Galen | June 18, 2008 12:09 PM

People like Albright and Christopher obviously have enough direct personal experience that it is worth talking to them for that reason alone (meaning without necessarily accepting whatever conclusions they would in turn draw from that experience). And Nunn is definitely someone you would want to talk to about proliferation issues. So, I really don't see the harm here to including them.

Posted by DTM | June 18, 2008 12:11 PM

This list is depressing, but not surprising to those of us that never drank the koolaid. How many times over the coming years will we have to tell Obamabots like Matt "I told you so"?

Posted by Marlowe | June 18, 2008 12:16 PM

"Depressingly, there is not a single innovative, controversial, outside-the-box thinker on this list. Where is the intellectual challenge and vitality?"

My reaction exactly.

Posted by kafka | June 18, 2008 12:27 PM

Do you guys actually know anything about most of these people? For instance, do a little research about Richard Danzig. He is a progressive who stuck his neck out by supporting Obama (despite being a Clinton administration appointee) at the outset of his campaign. I think if you did some research you would come to a different conclusion than "there is not a single innovative, controversial, outside-the-box thinker on this list."

Posted by rts | June 18, 2008 12:34 PM

At this point, I am more concerned with his choice of military adviser, Merrill McPeak. I'm sure that the general was a fine air force officer but, given the examples of former Joint Chief of Staff General Myers and Israeli Chief of Staff General Halutz, having an air force general as ones' principal adviser does not inspire confidence. Having taken Air Force ROTC as an undergraduate perhaps prejudices me against air force officers but Senator Osama better get a couple of army/marine corps generals on board post haste (General Zinni and/or General Clark for instance).

Posted by SLC | June 18, 2008 1:10 PM

rts,

Indeed, and I have a feeling that some people are just looking at the most famous names on the list and concluding from those names that this is nothing but "old guard" people. But of course that is bound to happen, since the "old guard" people on the list are likely to be the most famous names.

That said, I'm not sure how "innovative" people are expecting Obama to be on foreign policy. I've seen articles where people like Lake, Rice, Danzig, and so on think there were lessons to be learned from the Clinton Administration's foreign policy failures, but they are talking in terms of relatively minor improvements in approach and some different judgments in specific cases, not a radically different overall approach. Of course their approach would be radically different from the Bush Administration approach, but that is because the Bush Administration itself took a radical approach to foreign policy (with disasterous consequences).

Posted by DTM | June 18, 2008 1:17 PM

Broder, Ohanlon and Friedman would fit right in on this "working group"!

Posted by change? | June 18, 2008 1:17 PM

This list looks like it could be from Hillary...why did we just have this election?

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 1:24 PM

Soft gloves and a nice smile on a brown face to front the empire!

Posted by TAC | June 18, 2008 1:28 PM

"It appears the events of the past seven years, and the deep, systematic failure of the entire US foreign policy establishment during that time, have forced no substantive reevaluations of the broad direction of US foreign policy, have provoked no move away from complacent continuity with the past, and have not had the slightest influence on the thinking of government leaders."

Pardon me, but these people were not the foreign policy establishment of the last seven years. Many of them are from the Clinton team. And the Clinton foreign policy mostly worked.

Posted by Bill Gardner | June 18, 2008 1:31 PM

Albright can bite me.

But I don't think foreign policy necessarily NEEDS deep thinkers (unless you're trying to justify some policy that wouldn't be obvious or popular by itself - killing Arabs and overthrowing their governments to "remake" the middle east, for instance)...

Look where the "deep thinkers" got us last time.

The guiding principle should be "leave other people alone". Trade, make nice, make allies. Humanitarian disasters will be obvious, and support should be widespread (if not resources and troops). Self-defense will also (almost always) be obvious. No fancy justifications or coalition building would be necessary in a true emergency, which is the only time we use the military.

The people fooled about the Iraq war seemed to be the deep-thinking chin-scratchers, who, by my best guess, weren't actually fooled, but were just dishonest about their motivations.

Posted by screwallyall | June 18, 2008 1:34 PM

"It appears the events of the past seven years, and the deep, systematic failure of the entire US foreign policy establishment during that time, have forced no substantive reevaluations of the broad direction of US foreign policy, have provoked no move away from complacent continuity with the past, and have not had the slightest influence on the thinking of government leaders."

Pardon me, but these people were not the foreign policy establishment of the last seven years. Many of them are from the Clinton team. And the Clinton foreign policy mostly worked.

Posted by Bill Gardner | June 18, 2008 1:36 PM

Warren Christopher!!! This is terrible!!! The best and the brightest in the liberal blogosphere was telling us just last month what a horrible person Warren Christopher is!!!!

Posted by jerry | June 18, 2008 1:40 PM

This is big f-u to the people that won the primary for obama! Win ..then lunge back to center of a failed foreign policy establishment that brought you Iraq!!!!

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 1:58 PM

This is big f-u to the people that won the primary for obama! Win ..then lunge back to center of a failed foreign policy establishment that brought you Iraq!!!!

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 1:59 PM

Marlowe:

This list is depressing, but not surprising to those of us that never drank the koolaid. How many times over the coming years will we have to tell Obamabots like Matt "I told you so"?

I'm already sick of twats like this anonymous poster.

Posted by Peter K. | June 18, 2008 2:00 PM

This list says business as usual in the empire...the real "change" must be all about gay marriage!

Posted by chimp | June 18, 2008 2:08 PM

Do you guys actually know anything about most of these people? For instance, do a little research about Richard Danzig. He is a progressive who stuck his neck out by supporting Obama (despite being a Clinton administration appointee) at the outset of his campaign. I think if you did some research you would come to a different conclusion than "there is not a single innovative, controversial, outside-the-box thinker on this list."

Posted by rts | June 18, 2008 12:34 PM

=================================================

Danzig "thinks outside the box" all right!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2139573/Barack-Obama-aide-Why-Winnie-the-Pooh-should-shape-US-foreign-policy.html

Barack Obama aide: Why Winnie the Pooh should shape US foreign policy

Mr Danzig told the Centre for New American Security: “Winnie the Pooh seems to me to be a fundamental text on national security.”

He spelt out how American troops, spies and anti-terrorist officials could learn key lessons by understanding the desire of terrorists to emulate superheroes like Luke Skywalker, and the lust for violence of violent football fans.
=================================================

Can't WAIT to watch this guy's Congressional hearings.

Posted by Campesino | June 18, 2008 2:15 PM

Mostly Iran/Iraq bombers but he has Winnie the Pooh bombers too!

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 2:29 PM

Wait... David Boren? Dad of Dan Boren, the guy who is not endorsing Obama? Hmmm...

Posted by kmramki | June 18, 2008 2:34 PM

The inclusion of walking dead Warren Christopher is the biggest FU I have ever witnessed in politics. To me. Because cotton-candy mouth Christopher is pathetic. He is probably the only human in Washington older than McCain, too.

That list is not comforting -- at all. They forgot Les Aspen and Jimmy Carter! Is this some kind of "so inside the box that it is outside the box" move or what?

Posted by jim | June 18, 2008 2:39 PM

if Madeleine Albright is remembered at all, it should be for defending sanctions on Iraq, even though half-a-million Iraqi children would die. "We Think The Price Worth It."

Lee Hamilton is a sold-out, doctrinaire, spineless political hack. Nunn & Boren are both bought-and-paid-for Pentagon flacks.

This list should pretty well put paid to any untoward rumors that the new bahss gonna be much different from dat ol' bahss...

Posted by woody, tokin librul | June 18, 2008 2:42 PM

if Madeleine Albright is remembered at all, it should be for defending sanctions on Iraq, even though half-a-million Iraqi children would die. "We Think The Price Worth It."

Lee Hamilton is a sold-out, doctrinaire, spineless political hack. Nunn & Boren are both bought-and-paid-for Pentagon flacks.

This list should pretty well put paid to any untoward rumors that the new bahss gonna be much different from dat ol' bahss...

Posted by woody, tokin librul | June 18, 2008 2:45 PM

Brownie for head of FEMA?

Posted by centrist | June 18, 2008 2:57 PM

That list is not comforting -- at all. They forgot Les Aspen and Jimmy Carter! Is this some kind of "so inside the box that it is outside the box" move or what?

Posted by jim | June 18, 2008 2:39 PM
=================================================

Sorry to break this to you but Les Aspin died in 1995. Course that may be more reason to put him on the list.

Posted by Campesino | June 18, 2008 3:05 PM

Take Nunn off the VP list. This demonstrates he'll be marginalized. That's a great thing for Obama's ticket.

Write it down: Wes Clark is going to be Obama's VP.

Posted by Jeremiah Jones | June 18, 2008 3:39 PM

Like it or not, what this really is is a list of people who are going to be offering him advice on foreign policy debate points with John McCain. The title of the group is the first clue....it doesn't say "foreign policy."

Posted by artappraiser | June 18, 2008 3:45 PM

if Madeleine Albright is remembered at all, it should be for defending sanctions on Iraq, even though half-a-million Iraqi children would die. "We Think The Price Worth It."

That's why I was for regime change, it ended the sanctions and all of those kids dying.

Brzezinski should be remembered for arming the jihadists in Afghanistan and bleeding the USSR into extinction. He said it was worth it, I'm not so sure.

Posted by Peter K. | June 18, 2008 4:37 PM

Sorry to break this to you but Les Aspin died in 1995. Course that may be more reason to put him on the list.

So? Warren Christopher died in 1999.

Posted by jim | June 18, 2008 5:04 PM

William Perry! Isn't he the guy who wanted to BOMB NORTH KOREA over the nuclear issue?

Fuck! I TOLD you people that Obama was fucking CLUELESS about national security and foreign policy!

This list proves it. If he listens to these people, he'll be at war with Iran about the same time McCain would be!

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | June 18, 2008 5:10 PM

William Perry! Isn't he the guy who wanted to BOMB NORTH KOREA over the nuclear issue?

=================================================

Yes, the same William Perry who is a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution (ie Republican think tank) and who has worked with the eeeevil Carlyle Group (part of the Chimpy McHalliburton military industrial complex cabal)

http://www.hoover.org/bios/perry.html

http://www.cephasministry.com/nwo_judicial_watch_to_file_lawsuit_over_carlyle_group.html

And documents recently uncovered through Judicial Watch's FOIA to the Department of Defense shows that the Carlyle Group has high-level access to the U.S. government. The documents include a February 15, 2001 letter on Carlyle Group letterhead to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from former Defense Secretaries Frank Carlucci and William Perry, both now with Carlyle Group. The documents also include Secretary Rumsfeld's April 3 response to Messrs. Carlucci and Perry. The letters seemingly discuss the restructuring of the Defense Department. The Carlyle Group is listed in the documents as Defense Department contractor. Copies of the letters will be available on the Judicial Watch Internet site at www.judicialwatch.org.

=================================================

Now that's change you can believe in!!! Or is Perry the person we've been waiting for?

Posted by Campesino | June 18, 2008 5:32 PM

Sorry to break this to you but Les Aspin died in 1995. Course that may be more reason to put him on the list.

So? Warren Christopher died in 1999.

Posted by jim | June 18, 2008 5:04 PM

=================================================

Well, you could make a case that he's been dead from the neck up since 1976 or so. But last I heard he's still walking around breathing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Christopher

Posted by Campesino | June 18, 2008 5:44 PM

A foreign policy expert who makes pop culture references?

Oh NO!

Posted by DTM | June 18, 2008 6:08 PM

This list is really depressing.

Posted by Jim weaver | June 18, 2008 7:22 PM

Madeleine Albright? Wow.

Is this the "Saddam Hussein has WMD and must be deposed" Albright, or the "we have an agreement with the North Koreans and we can trust them to keep it" Albright?

Change you can believe in!

Posted by Log Cabin | June 18, 2008 7:29 PM

Madeleine Albright? Wow.

Is this the "Saddam Hussein has WMD and must be deposed" Albright, or the "we have an agreement with the North Koreans and we can trust them to keep it" Albright?

Change you can believe in!

Posted by Log Cabin | June 18, 2008 7:30 PM

Log Cabin asks a good question about Waddlin' Madeleine Al-dull. Plus, the Warren Christopher who was the least inspiring public figure since Millard Fillmore? Eric Holder who advised Clinton to pardon a mega-crook who helped Iran illegally while the US was supporting Iraq back in the '80s---Marc Megarich?

Boren, Roemer, Perry & Nunn actually have peckers in their pants. But most of these empty suits & scarecrows in dresses are warmed-over Cy Vance/William Rogers wannabes!

I know airhead Norah O'Donnell thinks that Obama is about change, but someone should show her that list and ask what is in the list that means change.

Posted by daveinboca | June 18, 2008 9:47 PM

Log Cabin asks a good question about Waddlin' Madeleine Al-dull. Plus, the Warren Christopher who was the least inspiring public figure since Millard Fillmore? Eric Holder who advised Clinton to pardon a mega-crook who helped Iran illegally while the US was supporting Iraq back in the '80s---Marc Megarich?

Boren, Roemer, Perry & Nunn actually have peckers in their pants. But most of these empty suits & scarecrows in dresses are warmed-over Cy Vance/William Rogers wannabes!

I know airhead Norah O'Donnell thinks that Obama is about change, but someone should show her that list and ask what is in the list that means change.

Posted by daveinboca | June 18, 2008 9:47 PM

Log Cabin asks a good question about Waddlin' Madeleine Al-dull. Plus, the Warren Christopher who was the least inspiring public figure since Millard Fillmore? Eric Holder who advised Clinton to pardon a mega-crook who helped Iran illegally while the US was supporting Iraq back in the '80s---Marc Megarich?

Boren, Roemer, Perry & Nunn actually have peckers in their pants. But most of these empty suits & scarecrows in dresses are warmed-over Cy Vance/William Rogers wannabes!

I know airhead Norah O'Donnell thinks that Obama is about change, but someone should show her that list and ask what is in the list that means change.

Posted by daveinboca | June 18, 2008 10:08 PM

Log Cabin asks a good question about Waddlin' Madeleine Al-dull. Plus, the Warren Christopher who was the least inspiring public figure since Millard Fillmore? Eric Holder who advised Clinton to pardon a mega-crook who helped Iran illegally while the US was supporting Iraq back in the '80s---Marc Megarich?

Boren, Roemer, Perry & Nunn actually have peckers in their pants. But most of these empty suits & scarecrows in dresses are warmed-over Cy Vance/William Rogers wannabes!

I know airhead Norah O'Donnell thinks that Obama is about change, but someone should show her that list and ask what is in the list that means change.

Posted by daveinboca | June 18, 2008 10:12 PM

Rough crowd around here. Why get all worked up about a foreign policy advisory group during the summer before a presidential election?

Posted by fnook | June 18, 2008 11:28 PM

i can't understand the charges of hypocrisy. old hands, new head. just because washington has been in the dark about foreign policy for the last 20 years, doesn't mean that all the talent there is spoiled. sure, i'd love for him to hire the editorial board of The Nation magazine as his foreign policy team, but that's never going to happen.

These people will be old servants of a new agenda, a change agenda.

Posted by ZadieSmith | June 19, 2008 1:17 AM

I thought i voted for something else...something fresh....not warmed over clintonistas and liberal hawk types that cheered on Iraq! I would rather have Reagen Paleo types than this crowd....at least they were as smarter than most on Iraq!

Posted by centrist | June 19, 2008 10:01 AM

This is "change?"

Looks more like more of the same (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, etc.)

Posted by Behihoo | June 20, 2008 1:13 AM

America hasn't had a decent (and by decent I mean non-genocidal to whoever happens to be in the way of the Empire this week) since...ever. Hopefully the whole place goes broke soon (as I told everyone last week was about to start in earnest) and we can Balkanize in peace.

There is a slim chance that the "real" Obama is riding into town in a Trojan horse, saying all the right things to AIPAC and having all the right people around to defuse criticism...Hope I get pleasantly surprised but not planning on it.

But really, this election is only about who gets to appoint 3 Supreme Court Justices, and we know we don't want McCain doing that job, so just plug your nose and pull the lever.

Posted by Alan Jacquemotte | June 20, 2008 3:33 PM

It is so amusing to read the comments of the deflated lefties on here.

Did you REALLY think Obama was some transformational figure?

Oh, he's transformational alright. He'll transform his positions, and his political allies, to suit the moment. Whether it's hypocritically and insincerely trashing his promise about campaign finance, or his AIPAC speech, or exhuming all the old Clinton warhorses...it's not about any ideals.

It's all about getting elected.

And to that end, Obama is not some great leader but in the end a "product" marketed to YOU...a figure upon whom you can impose your own emotional needs. He is a tabula rasa upon which so many of the ga-ga eyed minions can write their own vision of...well, whatever.

He is deodorant soap, he is body spray, he is the skin cream that promises endless youth...he is the perfect narcissist for the perfectly narcissitic.

He's yours because he's you. Congratulations.

Posted by Karl K | June 23, 2008 9:44 AM

Working Group

Comments (68)

Search

Books by Matthew Yglesias

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Weekly Archives

Categories