Ron Paul challenges GOP’s foreign policy agenda
Get Doug Bandow Feed
It has been nearly a decade since President George W. Bush chose arrogance over humility as the basis of American foreign policy. The intervening years have not been good for the United States or the Republican Party. As the GOP seeks to take back the White House it needs to conduct a serious foreign policy debate. Republicans should start by listening to Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).
At the recent Southern Republican Leadership Conference big spending Mitt Romney bested Rep. Paul by just one vote in the popularity contest. Yet Paul eschewed reliance on easy applause lines and challenged the newfound Republican fondness for big militaries and constant wars.
For instance, Paul observed that conservatives, like liberals, enjoyed spending money, only “on different things. They like embassies, and they like occupation. They like the empire. They like to be in 135 countries and 700 bases.”
Similarly, Paul said, conservatives talked about following the Constitution, “except for war. Let the president go to war anytime they want.”
Paul garnered applause from more youthful members of the audience. But boos were heard as well. Many establishment GOP activists appear to have become wedded to a big-government foreign policy.
When Politico polled activists and analysts about why the GOP mainstream was hostile to Paul, James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation complained that “The deliberate self-weakening of America is an invitation to disaster.” Carafano argued that Paul failed to fulfill the constitutional obligation to “provide for the common defense” and that the latter’s vision would not keep America “safe, free, and prosperous.”
Yet Washington’s policy of promiscuous intervention is not providing for America’s “common defense.” Rather, the U.S. is protecting virtually every other nation. That’s one reason why the Pentagon was incapable of defending Americans when the U.S. was attacked on 9/11,
Indeed, the “Defense Department” has become anything but. Most of America’s forces do nothing to secure the U.S. They instead are employed to remake failed societies, impose Washington’s meddlesome dictates, and subsidize populous and prosperous allies.
Do the Europeans want someone to stop a civil war in Yugoslavia? They leave it to Americans. Do the Georgians want someone to protect them after they start a war with Russia? Tbilisi begs Washington.
Do the South Koreans hope to subsidize North Korea while someone else guarantees their security? The South Korean “Blue House” calls the American “White House.” Do the Japanese want to concentrate on economic development while leaving the protection of regional security to another country? They turn to the U.S. Do the Israelis want someone else to disarm Iran? They call on Washington.
And in every case the Republican elite willingly answers “yes,” spending Americans’ money to provide for most every other nations’ defense.
The Europeans might have a larger collective GDP and population. The South Koreans might enjoy a GDP 40 times that of the North. Japan might have the world’s second largest economy. Israel might be a regional superpower with up to 200 nuclear weapons.
Yet in GOP eyes all are helpless American dependents, to be defended by Washington at all cost—and apparently forever.
This policy has made America weaker. We are less “safe, free, and prosperous” as a result.
(6 votes, average: 4.50 out of 5)
Loading ...
The concept of “global cop” is implies that US aggression is based on legality. It is not. The USA is not acting as a “global cop” but as “global mafia”, using brute force, threat, bribery, assassination, intimidation, and murder to loot resources from other nations. Don’t gives cops a bad name, please.
If a “strong” empire is what the establishment Republicans are fighting for then they are doing a fine job considering the fact that the sun never sets on the American Empire. Having troops in over 130 countries and occupying over 700 bases around the world is simply incompatible with a government which is limited (which is supposedly the primary platform of the Republican Party). If Conservatives do not want to be ridiculed for being hypocrits then this issue must be addressed.
Ron Paul was right, and we have to admit it. We need a strong national defense, and not a world emprire. I am not paying taxes to help defend the German or Japanese people.
Great article, its still sad to see that many still support the neocon policy of Military Socialism. Most of the apologists for it when confronted with the cost just say that its “cheaper” than entitlements. I didnt think human life was cheaper than a welfare check, but apparently to neocons it is. Dr Paul is still the only Republican worth supporting the only other one I can think of would be Gary Johnson.
I think the country is ready to at least start questioning the motivation for our foreign policy. If we are being lied to about everything else, why is it such a leap to suggest we are being lied to about foreign affairs? One point the author misses is that war is simply big business for a select few, another product of the corporate/political marriage of destruction. We must stop this “traitor” or “treason” nonsense and recognize, like every other policy, foreign policy needs to be questioned and discussed. It does not mean he who does is unAmerican. Terrorists attacks have produced horrible results, not the least of which is the blind, chest-thumping ignorant and arrogant assumption that our government is doing the right thing.
Speaking of dragons… for now China is looking inward as it rapidly industrializes. But in ten or twenty years the big red dragon will come out of it’s cave; a first-class, nuclear super-power with maybe the biggest army ever. Will they be content with their prosperity, or will they begin reaching out for more? Spreading their insidious communism in their wake.
When the dragon emerges we should be armed to the teeth and assured of what our vital interests are, where they are and what it will take to defend them. Not so that we can make war but so that China can avoid it. We need a foreign policy of discretion and common sense, not of appeasement or antagonism. Not Team America World Police. Not hippies.
Sadly, both parties suck at foreign policy. Building foreign countries seems to be one of the few things they agree on. We should be consolidating our vital interests, limiting our exposure to potential conflicts over things we don’t have a stake in, and meanwhile making sure our stick is bigger than China’s. So, Ron Paul… but with more guns.
Great article. If the GOP ever intends to win another presidential election, and if want to take back the House or Senate this year, they have to embrace Dr. Paul and the true traditional conservative stance of minding our own business and not looking for dragons to slay around the world. There is nothing conservative about endless war, lying to our troops about their deployments, overstretching them, paying them crap, and then saying we support the troops. Real conservatives want the troops home.
Bravo Mr. Bandow. Agree with every word.