DOCSLIB.ORG

The Republican Party After 2020: a Conversation with Michael Barone

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Republican Party After 2020: a Conversation with Michael Barone Hudson Institute Transcript: The Republican Party after 2020: A Conversation with Michael Barone TRANSCRIPT Discussion……………………………………………….………….……..………….…………...……2 • Michael Barone, Senior Political Analyst, Washington Examiner & Emeritus Fellow, American Enterprise Institute • Walter Russell Mead (Moderator), Ravenel B. Curry III Distinguished Fellow in Strategy and Statesmanship, Hudson Institute Disclaimer: This transcript is based off of a recorded video conference and breaks in the stream may have resulted in mistranscriptions in the text. A video of the event is available: https://www.hudson.org/events/1915-video-event-the- republican-party-after-2020-a-conversation-with-michael-barone12021 About Hudson Institute: Founded in 1961 by strategist Herman Kahn, Hudson Institute challenges conventional thinking and helps manage strategic transitions to the future through interdisciplinary studies in defense, international relations, economics, health care, technology, culture, and law. Hudson seeks to guide public policy makers and global leaders in government and business through a vigorous program of publications, conferences, policy briefings, and recommendations Hudson Institute | 1201 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Fourth Floor, Washington DC 20004 The Republican Party after 2020: A Conversation with Michael Barone | January 22, 2021 Walter Russell Mead: Well, hello, everybody. It is both a pleasure and a privilege to be here this morning with probably the greatest living student of American political parties and most interesting analyst of American politics. Some of you, I'm sure, know of Michael Barone because of his pioneering work as co-founder of The Almanac of American Politics, a book that's been as close to a bible for American politics as there has been for decades now. He is also, I think, one of the most interesting students of the Republican Party in particular, and given the dramatic events of the last couple of months, it's the Republican Party that we'll be talking about today. So, let me just ask to kick things off, what is the state of the Republican Party today as President Biden settles into the White House? Michael Barone: Well, the state of the Republican Party today is, in the eyes of some observers, almost terminal and sure to be riven apart by schisms and be repudiated by the voters. I would say the Republican Party is in about as good shape as a party that has lost the presidency, lost the Senate, lost the House of Representatives, has ever been in the course of American history. I've been following this stuff for quite a few years now, going back to reading Time magazine and U.S. News & World Report when I was growing up in Michigan. I've lived through many predictions of the demise of the Republican Party, the demise of the Democratic Party. These parties are old. They've been around a long time. They've endured. The Republican Party is 166 years old. The Democratic is 188 years old. They are the oldest and third- oldest political parties in the world, with British Conservative Party probably being number two, depending on when you date its founding. I think, as I argued in my recent pre-COVID book, How America's Political Parties Change (and How They Don't), they have a fundamental character, each of them different, which has enabled them both to endure for a long time, to suffer through seemingly terminal crises and repudiations by the voters, and to come back trumping. The Republican Party, since its beginnings in opposition to Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854, has always been a party centered around a core constituency of people who are thought by themselves and others to be typical Americans, but who are not by themselves a majority. When it started off, it was New England Yankees and their descendants, the Yankee Diaspora that ran through upstate New York, northeast Ohio, southern Michigan, out to Chicago and Iowa. That was the foundation of the Republican Party. Today, you might say it's white, married Christian people are this core constituency of the Republican Party, increasingly a constituency of the subgroup that are not college graduates. Those have changed over the time. The Democratic Party has been a coalition of out groups, of people not thought to be typical Americans, who are often very different in their values and so forth, from each other. So, the Democratic Party has had great vivid splits, and also, when it's coalesced together, it's been a major majority party. I think having two parties of those two different characters has been one way that politics has kept together a country that has always had diversity. It has always had ethnic, regional, religious, economic, racial diversity from its very beginning. We didn't suddenly become diverse in the last 18 months or the last 10 years. We were diverse when we were British colonies in the 18th and 17th century. So, the Republican Party, it was supposed to disappear after Barry Goldwater. It was supposed to never be elected a conservative denominated president until the election of Ronald Reagan. When Bill Clinton 2 The Republican Party after 2020: A Conversation with Michael Barone | January 22, 2021 came in, it was going to be a minority again, and, in fact, has been competitive, and it continues to be competitive. If you want to just do numbers, the Republican Party lost the presidency by virtue of 42,000 votes cast in margins for the Democratic nominee in Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin. Three states. That's less than the margin by which Donald Trump won four years ago, 77,000 in three different states. It has 50 of the 100 U.S. senators. It has ... I think it's now 212, 213 members of the House of Representatives in which 218 is a majority. It has majorities in most state legislatures in this country and actually gained state legislators in 2020, over 2018. It's out of power. It's got some serious differences of opinion among Republican officeholders and voters. But, in terms of where it starts off from, as a minority party, it is, by historical standards, in pretty strong shape. Walter Russell Mead: I guess when people talk about a crisis of the Republican Party, they're really talking about the relationship between Donald Trump and the future of the Republican Party and the Trump movement. I think you've said that in some ways, in terms of his Republican approval, Trump was a fairly typical example of a Republican president. Does the Trump factor change the outlook for Republicans or complicate the outlook for Republicans? Michael Barone: Well, I think the Trump factor complicates the outcome for Republicans. One of the things you can see when you look at public opinion polls and support for presidential candidates is that Republican voters, voters who self-identify as Republicans, tend to show strong support for Republican incumbent presidents of varying stripes. That's been true since polling began in 1935. The Republican presidents in question were Dwight Eisenhower. Very solid support from Republicans, although some conservative political writers and politicians were unhappy with some of his policies. Richard Nixon, until he got into political trouble with the Watergate scandal, was similar. Gerald Ford, as a president not been elected, did not have a strong support, perhaps, and had to win the primary fight. But, in the general election, he got solid support from Republicans in 1976. Ronald Reagan, the two George Bushes, maintain support from Republicans by and large. And, Donald Trump did. I think one of the things we see is that Republican voters, centered around that core constituency, whose character has changed over time, but has always remained ... There's always remained a core constituency ... support their incumbent presidents. Then, when they leave office, unlike Democrats, they don't seem to have much sentimental regard for them. We see some of that for Ronald Reagan, but, generally speaking, the Republicans, if you go to Republican National Conventions ... And, I have attended in one way shape or form, 11 of those, 13 Democratic National Conventions, going back to 1968. They don't celebrate, write hymns to celebrate its philosopher kings, their previous Republican presidents. One reason for that was that President Nixon left office in unhappy circumstances. But, basically, they simply don't do that very much. With Donald Trump, what you saw was a stronger tendency on his part to repudiate past Republican presidents. He called President George W. Bush a liar about the Iraq War and things. That may explain why neither second President Bush nor his father, when he was alive, was supporting Mister Trump for president in 2016. Understandable in those circumstances. But, for Republican voters, once he was in office, Donald Trump got 90% support. Even though he had gotten less than half the primary popular votes in primaries and caucuses in the 2016 things, nobody ran against him in the Republican primaries in 2020, even though you had various people advertising themselves as Never Trumpers. 3 The Republican Party after 2020: A Conversation with Michael Barone | January 22, 2021 And so, I think the interesting question is whether or not Republican voters are going to discard President Trump as, in effect, they seem to discard the President Bushes after they were gone, as they have discarded most of their former presidents and historic heroes. They don't seem to have much sentimental regard for them. You hear them talking sometimes about Abraham Lincoln, but, of course, the policy lessons that Lincoln gives us from dealing with the issues of his time are not always very helpful relevant to the issues now. We don't have a Civil War, and they tend to have solidarity.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Review Essays
    Review Essays The Mechanics of Empire by John Hillen John Hillen ([email protected]) is a trustee of the Foreign Policy Research Institute and director of its Program on National Security. He is a contributing editor at National Review. Walter Russell Mead, Power, Terror, Peace, and War: America’s Grand Strategy in a World at Risk (New York: Knopf, 2004) $19.95 Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire (New York: Penguin, 2004) $25.95 Robert Cooper, The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the 21st Century (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2003) $18.95 Francis Fukuyama, State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2004) $21 James Dobbins, et al., America’s Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, 2003) $35 Just as it took a few years after World War II for the nature of the Cold War and the strategy of containment to become evident,1 so too the reality of the Bush doctrine and the practicalities of waging a war on terrorism and promoting democratization and globalization are only now becoming clearer. As active as the United States has been over the past three years, the operating tenets and mechanics of a durable grand strategy have yet to come. The books under consideration here address that dilemma. They all explicitly accept what has come to be the general principle of American grand strategy: that the surest way to attain lasting security is for the United States to enlarge the community of nations and other groups that generally ascribe to liberal political and economic values.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It
    September 2020 Perspective EXPERT INSIGHTS ON A TIMELY POLICY ISSUE JAMES DOBBINS, GABRIELLE TARINI, ALI WYNE The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It n the aftermath of World War II, the United States accepted the mantle of global leadership and worked to build a new global order based on the principles of nonaggression and open, nondiscriminatory trade. An early pillar of this new Iorder was the Marshall Plan for European reconstruction, which British histo- rian Norman Davies has called “an act of the most enlightened self-interest in his- tory.”1 America’s leaders didn’t regard this as charity. They recognized that a more peaceful and more prosperous world would be in America’s self-interest. American willingness to shoulder the burdens of world leadership survived a costly stalemate in the Korean War and a still more costly defeat in Vietnam. It even survived the end of the Cold War, the original impetus for America’s global activ- ism. But as a new century progressed, this support weakened, America’s influence slowly diminished, and eventually even the desire to exert global leadership waned. Over the past two decades, the United States experienced a dramatic drop-off in international achievement. A generation of Americans have come of age in an era in which foreign policy setbacks have been more frequent than advances. C O R P O R A T I O N Awareness of America’s declining influence became immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic and by Obama commonplace among observers during the Barack Obama with Ebola, has also been widely noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorists, Despots, and Democracy
    Terrorists, Despots, and Democracy: What Our Children Need to Know Terrorists, Despots, and Democracy: WHAT OUR CHILDREN NEED TO KNOW August 2003 1 1627 K Street, NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006 202-223-5452 www.edexcellence.net THOMAS B. FORDHAM FOUNDATION 2 WHAT OUR CHILDREN NEED TO KNOW CONTENTS WHY THIS REPORT? Introduction by Chester E. Finn, Jr. .5 WHAT CHILDREN NEED TO KNOW ABOUT TERRORISM, DESPOTISM, AND DEMOCRACY . .17 Richard Rodriguez, Walter Russell Mead, Victor Davis Hanson, Kenneth R. Weinstein, Lynne Cheney, Craig Kennedy, Andrew J. Rotherham, Kay Hymowitz, and William Damon HOW TO TEACH ABOUT TERRORISM, DESPOTISM, AND DEMOCRACY . .37 William J. Bennett, Lamar Alexander, Erich Martel, Katherine Kersten, William Galston, Jeffrey Mirel, Mary Beth Klee, Sheldon M. Stern, and Lucien Ellington WHAT TEACHERS NEED TO KNOW ABOUT AMERICA AND THE WORLD . .63 Abraham Lincoln (introduced by Amy Kass), E.D. Hirsch, Jr., John Agresto, Gloria Sesso and John Pyne, James Q. Wilson, Theodore Rabb, Sandra Stotsky and Ellen Shnidman, Mitchell B. Pearlstein, Stephen Schwartz, Stanley Kurtz, and Tony Blair (excerpted from July 18, 2003 address to the U.S. Congress). 3 RECOMMENDED RESOURCES FOR TEACHERS . .98 SELECTED RECENT FORDHAM PUBLICATIONS . .109 THOMAS B. FORDHAM FOUNDATION 4 WHAT OUR CHILDREN NEED TO KNOW WHY THIS REPORT? INTRODUCTION BY CHESTER E. FINN, JR. mericans will debate for many years to come the causes and implications of the September 11 attacks on New York City and Washington, as well as the foiled attack that led to the crash of United Airlines flight 93 in a Pennsylvania field. These assaults comprised far too traumatic an event to set aside immediately like the latest Interstate pile-up.
    [Show full text]
  • To View This Issue of Political Report As An
    Volume 5, Issue 6 • June 2009 Obama in Motion Views about how President Barack Obama is handling his responsibilities as president are generally positive, although negative impressions about his handling of the economy have risen. Favorable impressions of Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have dropped, but Michelle Obama is more popular than four months ago and more popular than her husband. Nearly six in ten view the Democratic Party favorably; four in ten give that response about the GOP. Q: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling . ? ——His job as president—— ———Foreign affairs——— ———The economy——— Approve Disapprove Approve Disapprove Approve Disapprove February 2009 63% 26% 54% 22% 59% 30% May 2009 61 34 59 32 55 42 Note: In the late May poll, 55 percent approved of the job the president was doing handling terrorism, while 37 percent disapproved. Forty- six percent approved of his handling the budget deficit (48 percent disapproved). Forty-five percent approved of his efforts to control federal spending, while 51 percent disapproved. Source: Gallup/USA Today. Q: As I read some names, please tell me if you have a . ? ———Barack Obama——— ————Joe Biden———— ———Michelle Obama——— Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable January 2009 78% 18% 63% 20% 68% 18% May 2009 67 32 April 51 28 76 13 Source: Gallup/USA Today. Source: PSRA/Pew Research Center. Q: I’d like to get your opinion of some groups and organizations. Is your overall opinion of . ? Favorable Unfavorable Favorable Unfavorable The Democratic Party The Republican Party January 2009 62% 32% January 2009 40% 55% April 2009 59 34 April 2009 40 51 Source: PSRA/Pew Research Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Sagamore in the Nation's Service
    SAGAMORE IN THE NATION’S SERVICE 2006-2009 Deborah Daniels served as president of Sagamore lowed by a half dozen Sagamore board members Institute from 2006-08 and her career epitomizes the eventually serving in the Bush administration. think tank’s vision for local impact and national influ- The Honorable Daniel R. Coats served as U.S. Am- ence. As the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District bassador to Germany from 2001-2005. He currently of Indiana during the President George H.W. Bush represents the people of Indiana as a member of the administration, Daniels helped pioneer the Weed and U.S. Senate. Seed program in Indianapolis integrating law enforce- James T. Morris served as the Executive Director of ment, community policing, violence prevention and the United Nations World Food Program, the world’s neighborhood restoration efforts. The success led to largest food aid organization, from 2002-07. He is her being named the first Director of the Executive presently President of Pacers Sports and Entertain- Office of Weed and Seed at the U.S. Department of ment. Justice in 1992-93. Dr. Leslie Lenkowsky was chief executive officer of Daniels returned to Indianapolis in the mid-1990s the Corporation for National and Community Service to lead the Greater Indianapolis Progress Committee from 2001-04 serving under the leadership of CNCS which bolstered economic development and neigh- chair Stephen Goldsmith. Lenkowsky is now a faculty borhood revitalization during the national pace-set- member at Indiana University. ting administration of Indianapolis mayor Stephen Dr. Carol D’Amico served as Assistant Secretary Goldsmith.
    [Show full text]
  • (Pdf) Download
    NATIONAL & LOCAL NEWS MEDIA TV, RADIO, PRINT & ONLINE SOURCES Master List - Updated 04/2019 Pain Warriors Unite Washington Post: Website: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/submit-an-op-ed/?utm_term=.d1efbe184dbb What are the guidelines for letter submissions? Email: [email protected] We prefer letters that are fewer than 200 words and take as their starting point an article or other item appearing in The Post. They may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name; anonymous letters and letters written under pseudonyms will not be considered. For verification purposes, they must also include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers, including a daytime telephone number. Writers should disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject matter of their letters. If sending email, please put the text of the letter in the body and do not send attachments; attachments will not be read. What are the guidelines for op-ed submissions? Submissions should be limited to 800 words. We consider only completed articles and cannot commit to, or provide guidance on, article proposals. Op-eds may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name — anonymous op-eds or op-eds written under pseudonyms will not be considered. They also must include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers. Additionally, we ask that writers disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject at hand. Please use our op-ed submission form L.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcribed By
    - Edited Transcript - presented a discussion entitled Keeping the Republic: Saving America by Trusting Americans September 26, 2011, 12:00–1:30pm Program and Panel 12:00 p.m. Welcome by Hudson Institute's John Walters 12:10 Panel discussion Mitch Daniels, Governor of Indiana and and former Hudson Institute president and CEO David Brooks, New York Times Op-Ed Columnist William Galston, Senior Fellow of Governance at The Brookings Institution John Walters, Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President of Hudson Institute (moderator) 1:10 Question-and-answer session 1:30 Adjournment HUDSON INSTITUTE JOHN WALTERS: Good afternoon. I’m John Walters. I’m senior vice president and chief operating officer here at Hudson. Let me welcome you to the Betsy and Walter Stern Conference Center on behalf of Hudson Institute. We are glad you all could be here. We’re honored to have as today’s guest Governor Mitch Daniels. He is of course no stranger to Hudson. He led us in the past and went on to be an enormously important national leader. About a year ago we were given the opportunity to honor him as the recipient of the 2010 Herman Kahn Award. He tells the story of how he was punished for telling the truth during that in his book, so I’ll let him follow up. Let me just briefly introduce our speakers. In addition to Governor Daniels, who has served in many leadership positions, we’re joined by David Brooks, who is a New York Times columnist and has been a senior editor at the Weekly Standard.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009
    PHILANTHROPY / EVENT TRANSCRIPT The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009 By Irving Kristol Edited by Gertrude Himmelfarb February 2, 2011 Panel Discussion of The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays, 1942-2009 By Irving Kristol Edited by Gertrude Himmelfarb Wednesday, February 2, 2011 Table of Contents Ken Weinstein 1 Amy Kass 1 Charles Krauthammer 3 Irwin Stelzer 7 Leon Kass 11 William Kristol 15 Q&A 23 Gertrude Himmelfarb (“Bea Kristol”) 30 Speaker Biographies 31 © 2011 Hudson Institute Hudson Institute is a nonpartisan, independent policy research organization. Founded in 1961, Hudson is celebrating a half century of forging ideas that promote security, prosperity, and freedom. www.hudson.org Ken Weinstein Good afternoon. I’m Ken Weinstein, CEO of Hudson Institute. I’d like to welcome everyone to today’s Book Forum on the newly published The Neoconservative Persuasion: Selected Essays 1942- 2009, by Irving Kristol, which has been edited by the redoubtable Gertrude Himmelfarb. The book is available for sale in the back at the discounted price of $20, and I urge all of you to get one before you leave. This is a truly remarkable book, one that shows the breadth and the depth of Irving Kristol’s thought over some 67 years, which you’ll be hearing about shortly. My colleagues and I frankly feel privileged that Hudson Institute is the venue for today’s book forum, and I should thank the book’s editor, Gertrude Himmelfarb, for giving us this auspicious honor. (Applause.) We have a truly distinguished panel, who will offer their reflections shortly, but before we get underway I should note that this is Hudson Institute’s 50th anniversary year, and to mark this occasion, the Institute has begun a 50th anniversary seminar series, and today’s exceptional Book Forum is the second event in this series.
    [Show full text]
  • WHY COMPETITION in the POLITICS INDUSTRY IS FAILING AMERICA a Strategy for Reinvigorating Our Democracy
    SEPTEMBER 2017 WHY COMPETITION IN THE POLITICS INDUSTRY IS FAILING AMERICA A strategy for reinvigorating our democracy Katherine M. Gehl and Michael E. Porter ABOUT THE AUTHORS Katherine M. Gehl, a business leader and former CEO with experience in government, began, in the last decade, to participate actively in politics—first in traditional partisan politics. As she deepened her understanding of how politics actually worked—and didn’t work—for the public interest, she realized that even the best candidates and elected officials were severely limited by a dysfunctional system, and that the political system was the single greatest challenge facing our country. She turned her focus to political system reform and innovation and has made this her mission. Michael E. Porter, an expert on competition and strategy in industries and nations, encountered politics in trying to advise governments and advocate sensible and proven reforms. As co-chair of the multiyear, non-partisan U.S. Competitiveness Project at Harvard Business School over the past five years, it became clear to him that the political system was actually the major constraint in America’s inability to restore economic prosperity and address many of the other problems our nation faces. Working with Katherine to understand the root causes of the failure of political competition, and what to do about it, has become an obsession. DISCLOSURE This work was funded by Harvard Business School, including the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness and the Division of Research and Faculty Development. No external funding was received. Katherine and Michael are both involved in supporting the work they advocate in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • TOPLINE Broad Story Topic (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Top 10 Stories
    TOPLINE Broad Story Topic (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Topic % of newshole Daily Show Mainstream Press1 US Foreign Affairs 16.5% 18.5% Elections/ Politics 15.8 11.6 Government 14.6 6.8 Lifestyle 9.2 3.3 Press/ Media 8.4 2.7 Foreign (non-U.S.) 4.9 10.7 Celebrity/ Entertainment 4.5 2.1 Race/ Gender/ Gay Issues 3.0 1.2 Crime 2.7 7.6 Science/ Technology 2.6 1.2 Additional Domestic Affairs 2.6 2.5 Environment 2.5 1.6 Sports 2.0 1.8 Religion 1.9 0.7 Health/ Medicine 1.7 4.1 Defense/ Military (Domestic) 1.5 2.6 Immigration 1.1 2.8 Domestic Terrorism 0.8 1.9 Economics 0.7 3.2 Education 0.7 1.0 Business 0.6 3.2 Court/ Legal System 0.6 0.4 Catastrophes/ Disasters 0.4 5.1 US Miscellaneous 0.3 2.7 Transportation 0.2 0.7 Development/ Sprawl 0.1 0.2 Total2 99.9 100.2 Top 10 Stories (January 1 – November 1, 2007) Rank Story % of newshole Daily Show Mainstream Press 1 2008 Campaign 14.6% 8.8% 2 Debate over Iraq Policy 10.7 8.9 3 Events in Iraq 3.4 6.3 4 Fired U.S. Attorneys 3.3 1.8 5 Global Warming 2.2 1.1 6 Immigration 1.9 3.1 7 Domestic Terrorism 1.6 1.8 8 CIA Leak Investigation 1.5 1.2 9 Vice President Cheney Controversies 1.2 0.1 10 Iran 1.2 2.5 1 Mainstream press refers to 48 media outlets.
    [Show full text]
  • Hudson News and Review
    HUDSON INSTITUTE News & Review WWW.HUDSON.ORG FALL 2008 FOUR NEW SCHOLARS EXPAND HUDSON’S NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOREIGN POLICY WORK Hudson Institute is proud to announce the arrival of four Senior Fellows, each HUDSON with extensive experience in foreign policy and national security. “These distin- guished scholars highlight the speed and strength with which Hudson’s research SCHOLARS portfolio is growing,” Chairman Allan Tessler says. “National security studies RESPOND were a core part of Herman Kahn’s legacy, and we’re pleased to be extending our work in this vital field.” TO RUSSIAN ANDREW NATSIOS served as Administrator for U.S. Agency for Inter- AGGRESSION national Development from 2001 until 2006, where he oversaw the agency’s AGAINST reconstruction programs in Afghanis tan, Iraq, and Sudan. In 2006, President Bush appointed him Special Coor dinator for International Disaster Assistance GEORGIA and Special Humanitarian Coordinator for the Sudan. Natsios served previously at USAID, first as Director of the Office of Foreign When Russia rolled its tanks and artillery into Georgia on the eve of Disaster Assistance and then as Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Food the 2008 Olympics—initiating the and Humanitarian Assistance. He also served as a member CONTINUED ON PAGE 23 biggest European conflict since Clockwise from upper left, Douglas Feith, Andrew Natsios, Christopher Ford, and Hassan Mneimneh World War II—Hudson scholars were quickly sought out to dis- cuss the situation. From the inter- nal political ramifications in Rus- sia, to the constantly-changing geostrategic im plic a tions of the crisis, Hudson scholars examined the crisis from every angle.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Role in the World: Background and Issues for Congress
    U.S. Role in the World: Background and Issues for Congress Updated April 6, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44891 U.S. Role in the World: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The U.S. role in the world refers to the overall character, purpose, or direction of U.S. participation in international affairs and the country’s overall relationship to the rest of the world. The U.S. role in the world can be viewed as establishing the overall context or framework for U.S. policymakers for developing, implementing, and measuring the success of U.S. policies and actions on specific international issues, and for foreign countries or other observers for interpreting and understanding U.S. actions on the world stage. While descriptions of the U.S. role in the world since the end of World War II vary in their specifics, it can be described in general terms as consisting of four key elements: global leadership; defense and promotion of the liberal international order; defense and promotion of freedom, democracy, and human rights; and prevention of the emergence of regional hegemons in Eurasia. The issue for Congress is whether the U.S. role in the world is changing, and if so, what implications this might have for the United States and the world. A change in the U.S. role could have significant and even profound effects on U.S. security, freedom, and prosperity. It could significantly affect U.S. policy in areas such as relations with allies and other countries, defense plans and programs, trade and international finance, foreign assistance, and human rights.
    [Show full text]