On A Contradiction in US Cold War Grand Strategy

Reagan Kept Faith in America, BigPeace, February 6, 2011. "One of Reagan’s greatest contributions was to return to the commonsense faith that America worked, that the Soviet Union could not, and that we should, and could, win the Cold War by playing to our strengths and against their weaknesses. He was a remarkable orator, and one who was not afraid to speak simple truths plainly: his statement that the Soviet Union was an evil empire shocked an intelligentsia unused to hearing the obvious about an enemy that many no longer regarded as such. But he was more than an orator. Reagan believed that values could drive strategy, that if the U.S. and the West returned to freedom, if they abandoned the controls of the Nixon and Carter era, if they reduced taxes, if they put government back in its proper place, the U.S. would not only be doing the right thing. It would be fighting the Cold War to win."

OAS Shows Why We Don't Need CIFTA

CIFTA: Treaty Without a Purpose, Heritage Foundation Foundry, February 4, 2011. "CIFTA is a bad treaty: It poses serious risks to liberties guaranteed by the First and Second Amendments and would undermine U.S. sovereignty by legally binding it to fulfill obligations that some current signatories already disregard. The OAS’s latest statement on “Reducing the Threat of Arms and Munitions in the Americas” demonstrates that the treaty is pointless as well as bad."

Reagan's Writings

Reagan As Draftsman, Contentions, February 4, 2011. "Perhaps it’s not in keeping with Reagan’s legacy to lose hope. But I can’t help wondering if Reagan will be our last president who had the ability – even if none of them can be expected to have the time – to write his own speeches. If so, we will have lost something important. A president who cannot write clearly cannot be expected to think clearly either."

The Shah As Good Guy

Cold War Revisionism Run Wild, Contentions, February 3, 2011. "As J.E. Dyer pointed out a few days ago, the standard treatment of the Cold War in the academy of the 1970s and 1980s was that it was a bad idea. That argument had many facets, but among the most consistently presented of them was the theme that the artificial Cold War scare had been used to justify close American relations with anti-Communist dictators. This anti-Cold War bias has, to my mind, waned slightly, in part because of the work of historians like John Lewis Gaddis, and in part because it’s now history, and as such is safe for everyone to be in favor of. Indeed, it’s so safe that President Obama is free to call for Sputnik moments. Still, the argument about American foreign policy endures."

A Review of a Blair Review

On Kirchick on Blair, New Ledger, February 2, 2011. "Jamie Kirchick has a thoughtful review up for Policy Review of Tony Blair’s memoirs. It’s difficult to quarrel with Jamie’s conclusion, which is that the more Labour becomes a creature of the trade unions, the less likely it is to win an election. And I certainly endorse Jamie’s stout defense of Blair’s policies in Iraq and, more broadly, Blair’s support for close Anglo-American relations. But to my mind, the overall picture is less clear, and less favorable to Blair, than Jamie has it."

Kirkpatrick, Now More Than Ever

Go Read Kirkpatrick. Again, Contentions, February 1, 2011. "Now more than ever, Jeane Kirkpatrick’s “Dictatorships & Double Standards” essay deserves to be read and pondered. If this isn’t the greatest essay COMMENTARY has ever published, it’s certainly the most influential."

More On The "Sputnik Moment"

Re: Re: Oh, Man, Not Another Sputnik Moment . . ., Contentions, January 28, 2011. "J.E. Dyer’s reaction to my post on the “Sputnik moment” theme prompts this reflection: as a conservative, you can cite examples like the academy’s treatment of the Cold War all day long. If you’re a historian, you can point to the Arming America saga, which revealed that a few Second Amendment supporters and amateur historians had a better grasp of historical methodology and reality than the distinguished committee that awarded the Bancroft Prize to that faked book (and then was forced to take it back)."

The U.S. on Britain in Europe

A Policy That Pleases No One, Contentions, January 28, 2011. "In a private meeting with British MEPs on Tuesday, U.S. Ambassador to Britain Louis Susman is reported to have said: “Washington wants a clearer British commitment to remain in the EU. … [A]ll key issues must run through Europe.” He was not expressing a personal preference. He was reiterating the administration’s policy. After all, it was the vice president who last May described Brussels as “the capital of the free world.” But this is not a policy that is likely to achieve results satisfactory to anyone."

A Very Brave Aussie

Australian Courage in Afghanistan, Heritage Foundation Foundry, January 27, 2011. "An Australian member of the Special Air Service Regiment, Corporal Ben, has received the Victoria Cross For Australia, the nation’s highest military honor."

The Pretension to Expertise

A Tiger Mother in a Legal World on Fire, Contentions, January 27, 2011. "I don’t know much about parenting, so I’m not going to comment on the merits of Amy Chua’s much-discussed book Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother. What strikes me about the uproar is entirely unrelated to her Stakhanovite views on how to raise children: she’s a tenured professor at Yale Law School."

Hitchens, Churchill, and The Monarchy

Churchill, Edward VIII, and ‘Arms and the Covenant’, Contentions, January 26, 2011. "Christopher Hitchens doesn’t like The King’s Speech. Not because of its cinematic qualities, which he appreciates, but because of its political ones. According to him, the movie is a “a gross falsification of history” because it shows Churchill as “generally in favor of a statesmanlike solution to the crisis of the abdication” and because it neglects to portray Edward VIII as “a firm admirer of the Third Reich” and George VI as an appeaser and anti-Churchill."

Obama Uses Another Bad Historical Analogy

Oh, Man, Not Another Sputnik Moment . . ., Contentions, January 26, 2011. "I keep a list of historical analogies — derived from years of grading papers — that tell me that the individual using them is (to be polite) more interested in rhetorical impact than historical accuracy. Before last night, the list began with “we need a Marshall Plan for X,” where X usually equals Africa or the Middle East, and ended with “the United States is a young country.” Both are fallacies: the Marshall Plan was a pump-priming program, not an effort to rebuild the infrastructure and remake the culture of half a continent; and while European settlement of North America is fairly recent, the U.S.’s political institutions have a longer continuous existence than those of any other country except, arguably, the United Kingdom. Now, thanks to President Obama, I’ve got a third analogy to add to the list: 'Sputnik moment.'"

Response to State of the Union

Reaction Roundup: Heritage Responds to the State of the Union, Heritage Foundation Foundry, January 25, 2011. "In the opening section of his address, the President referred to the need to “sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but a light to the world.” Those are certainly words that conservatives can endorse and respect, just as they will agree with his statement that America is “the first nation the be founded for the sake of an idea.” As Matthew Spalding has stated, the American creed 'is set forth most clearly in the Declaration of Independence, . .. a timeless statement of inherent rights, the proper purposes of government, and the limits on political authority.' Unfortunately, this was not the creed that the President proclaimed in his speech."

Reforming the Treaty Process

If We Care About American Exceptionalism, It’s Time to Reform Our Treaty Processes, Conservative Home USA, January 19, 2010. "As an exceptional nation that values its sovereignty, the United States has much to gain from the practice of responsible diplomacy. After all, diplomacy was invented to allow sovereign states to interact and negotiate. Unfortunately, responsible diplomacy is at risk."

Citizenship and Historians

Historians and Civic Responsibility, Contentions, January 18, 2011. "The American Historical Association is on a roll. Last month, I felt compelled to read not one but two articles in its monthly newsmagazine, Perspectives on History. This month, the count is two again. Next thing you know, they’ll be hiring British historians in the academy. Well, let’s not get carried away."

The Fiftieth Anniversary of Kennedy's Inaugural

Kennedy’s Myth May Not Be Reality, But It Shows Us What Obama Lacks, Yorkshire Post, January 19, 2011. "FIFTY years after his inauguration on January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy remains America's most popular president in the last half-century. A recent survey by Gallup finds that 85 per cent of Americans retrospectively approve of Kennedy. The next highest ranking president, Ronald Reagan, scores only 74 per cent. Kennedy not only leads: he laps the field."

Eisenhower and Washington

Like Washington, Eisenhower's Farewell Address Counseled Balance, Heritage Foundation Foundry, January 17, 2011. "Fifty years ago, on January 17, 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower delivered his famous Farewell Address. The speech ranks, as Eisenhower intended it to, with Washington’s Farewell Address as a masterpiece of American rhetoric, of balance, and of prudent, far-seeing counsel. It is the fate of such masterpieces to be much quoted but seldom read. On this anniversary, therefore, before you read further, we encourage you to read the speech."

The Lost Prudential Tradition

Eisenhower, Washington, Lincoln, and Prudence, Contentions, January 14, 2011. "As commentators are beginning to note, Monday marks the 50th anniversary of Eisenhower’s Farewell Address, and the following Thursday marks the same anniversary for Kennedy’s inaugural, two classics of American rhetoric that could hardly be further apart and still remain in the same genre. It is a long way from Ike’s measured and noble praise of balance to Kennedy’s inspiring but unrestrained call to “pay any price.” It’s usual to say that the 1960s didn’t really began until Kennedy was assassinated, if not later, but the transition from Eisenhower’s restraint to Kennedy’s rhetorical lack of it may mark the transition more effectively than the murder in Dallas."

Decline and Fall?

The Links Between Economic Freedom and American Leadership in International Security, Heritage Foundation Foundry, January 13, 2011. "Economic freedom is not just a pocketbook issue: it is fundamental to American security. For the sake of its leading role in the world, as well as the prosperity of its citizens, the U.S. must return to the ranks of the economically free."

A Very Bad Christmas Card

A Bad Christmas Card, and in Retrospect, Even Worse, Contentions, December 22, 2010. "I don’t spend a lot of time hanging out on Liberal Democrat message boards. But a friend has pointed out a wonderful post – I hesitate to say it’s really in the spirit of the season, for reasons that will soon be obvious – by Stephen Tall on LibDemVoice, reproducing a Christmas card contained in the Conservative Party Archive and sent in 1938 by R.J. Rosie, a prominent physician, to Percy Cohen, a Jewish Conservative and then a member of the Conservative Research Department."

Four Points to Critics on CIFTA

Responding to Cmments on CIFTA, Heritage Foundation Foundry, December 21, 2010. "Several comments have taken issue with my post on the recent Washington Post article on the supposed prevalence of gun smuggling from the U.S. to Mexico. I’m glad to respond to their concerns."

Too Many Academics?

Peace Studies and the Historical Profession, Contentions, December 20, 2010. "I don’t say this very often – heck, I’m not sure I’ve ever said it – but the latest issue of Perspectives on History, the American Historical Association’s monthly newsmagazine, contains an interesting article. In fact, it contains two of them, both of which gain additional interest when coupled with recent events in Britain and a piece in the latest Economist on “The Disposable Academic.” The only question is whether the Economist is describing reality or offering a preference."

Oil for Food Kickbacks Wasted Again

Scotland Recovers, and Plans to Waste, Oil for Food Kickbacks, Contentions, December 19, 2010. "A Glasgow-based engineering firm, Weir Group, has been fined 3 million pounds, and had 13.9 million pounds of illegal profits confiscated, after it admitted paying kickbacks to Saddam Hussein’s regime. The Group, the BBC reports, made payments of 3.1 million pounds to the regime, plus another 1.4 million pounds to “an agent in Iraq” (regrettably not named in the judgment) in order to secure a contract worth approximately 35 million pounds. The Group, now under new management, fully acknowledged and apologized for its wrongdoing."

Defense Is Not Just About Defense Spending

The Defense Budget Is Not Just About Numbers, ConservativeHome, December 16, 2010. "There has been quite a bit of public debate about whether the defense budget should be cut along with the rest of the government as we get our deficit under control. This debate usually begins at the wrong end of the argument. The U.S. spends money on its armed forces in order to fulfill the Constitutionally-mandated requirement to provide for the common defense, and because, like all democracies, it has interests it seeks to advance. These interests are not simply material: because the U.S. was founded on the belief that the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are universal, our interests are defined, in part, by our values. Before critics blindly take a hacksaw to the defense budget, they should explain exactly how they propose to defend America’s citizens, interests, and values by spending less, or spell out precisely which of those responsibilities they plan to abandon."

The Flawed Ottawa Convention

The Ottawa Mine Ban Convention: Unacceptable on Substance and Process, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2496, December 13, 2010. "By announcing a review of U.S. landmine policy, the Obama Administration has reopened the possibility that the U.S. could become a party to the fatally flawed Ottawa Convention, which bans the use of all anti-personnel landmines. Such a ban applied to the U.S. would seriously degrade the ability of the U.S. to defend itself and its allies, particularly in Korea. Furthermore, the very process by which the convention was created is objectionable because it undermines responsible diplomacy and the sovereignty of the United States and other nation-states. The U.S. should shun the Ottawa Convention and the associated process, and instead pursue reasonable arms control through serious diplomacy."