Foreign Policy Likely to Be Key Issue in Presidential Election by John Shaw When this year began, it seemed likely that foreign policy issues would be central to the 2004 presidential electionóand that President George W. Bush would push to make them so. In the wake of the capture of Saddam Hussein, with the president still receiving high marks for his actions after 9/11 and with the U.S. economy in the doldrums, it seemed to make considerable sense for Bush to focus on foreign policy. Halfway through this election year, it still seems likely that foreign policy issues will be at the heart of the presidential campaign, but with Bush being vigorously challenged about his policies before 9/11, with the Iraq war increasingly unpopular and the economy picking up steam, it seems likely that Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry will try to place foreign policy at the core of the presidential debate. Analysts agree that American history shows that domestic issues are almost always the driving force in presidential elections. Ron Faucheux, an election expert with Campaigns and Elections magazine, said this presidential election will be driven by both foreign policy and domestic issues. ì But I think that foreign policy will be more important in this presidential election than in any campaign since 1980,î he said. ìFor Bush, the key theme will be security and safety, and he will argue that under his leadership the nation is safer. For Kerry, the theme will be mismanagement. He will argue that the Bush administration has badly mismanaged the war on Iraq and the war on terrorism, and this has made the nation less secure,î Faucheux explained. Charlie Cook, a political analyst and editor of the Cook Political Report, said the 2004 electoral landscape continues to shift, but foreign policy now appears to be a top-tier issue. ìThe economy and domestic issues are almost always paramount in presidential elections, but this year looks like it will be an exception,î Cook said. ìRight now the Iraq storyówhich has become THE foreign policy storyóhas just taken over the national political debate. Itís all Iraq, all the time. Itís dominating everything. It might not be the totally dominant issue in November, but it could be.î Cook said it is striking that polls released in mid-May show Bushís approval ratings continuing to slide even as the American economy recovers and creates hundreds of thousands of jobs. ìThe irony is that the presidentís approval ratings are falling at a time when the economyówhich had been Bushís Achilles heelóis improving, while the two areas that had been his strengthsóforeign policy and the war in Iraqóare quickly becoming his weaknesses,î Cook said. ìThe economy is doing demonstrably better and is really beginning to take off, but there is absolutely no evidence this is helping Bush, at least not yet.î Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) predicted that both foreign policy and economic issues will play pivotal roles in the race between Bush and Kerry. ìAfter Sept. 11, foreign policy is viewed more carefully and tangibly by the American people. My impression is that foreign policy will be an important part of the presidential debate but just how important it will be relative to the economy is not yet clear. The economy is getting stronger, and this will probably help the president,î Lugar said. ìBut the problems surrounding Iraq are obvious and of considerable concern to the American people,î the senator continued. ìWe donít know how things will turn out in Iraq. My sense is there are going to be a few more chapters in foreign policy that will be written between now and November. Some will pertain to Iraq. Others could relate to Afghanistan, Iran or Colombia.î Lugar recalled that when he ran for the Republican nomination for president in 1996, his attempt to focus on foreign policy generated little interest. ìWhen I ran for president in 1995 and 1996, people thought it was curious, even a little eccentric, to discuss foreign policy as much as I did and to make it a central part of my campaign,î he recalled. Sen. George Allen (R-Va.), a Republican member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said domestic issues and the economy are almost always the most important issues in a presidential election. But he added that this year foreign policy will be unusually prominent in the political debate. ìAfter 9/11, foreign policy became much more tangible. Itís about security and this affects peopleís sense of self-preservation,î he said. ìPeople will think about foreign policy when they vote for president.î Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a Democratic member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said both Bush and Kerry are struggling to find their footing in a complicated electoral landscape. ìA lot is going to happen on the economic and foreign policy front before November, but there is no doubt that foreign policy will be much more important than it usually has been in the recent past,î Nelson said. ìIt may be that you have to go back to 1980 to find an election in which foreign policy was as important as it is now.î Nelson said he expects Kerry will offer broad themes, but also a lot of specific ideas. ìIn a long, competitive campaign, it doesnít work too well to just rely on generalities. People suspect there isnít much there if you just keep repeating general statements.î But most analysts expect the Bush-Kerry battle over foreign policy to be largely waged over symbols and broad themes. The two candidates are less likely to quarrel over narrow policies than Americaís basic posture in the world. John Hamre, a former deputy secretary of defense in the Clinton administration and now president of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said an important foreign policy debate is under way. ìI think you already see a rich debate between Bush and Kerry. It is superficial, of course. Bush argues Kerry is really soft on defense, citing his voting record in the Senate. Kerry argues Bush has endangered U.S. interests through unilateralist policies,î Hamre said. ìClearly the war in Iraq will be a major factor in the election. It is still too early to say how it will affect it. At the present, it is pulling down President Bush. If it turns around in the summeróI am skeptical it willóit could help Bush,î he said. Hamre added that international issues in the 2004 election are likely to assume the same importance they had during the Cold War. ìUnlike the last three elections, this is an election like those during the Cold War, where security issues are prominent. I canít say they are decisive.î Analysts say that both Bush and Kerry will assemble detailed domestic policy platforms to appeal to their political bases, offering proposals on health care, education, creating jobs and reducing the deficit. But experts say the two candidates may differ most starkly on their visions for Americaís role in the international system. On the campaign trail, Bush says he responded to the historic challenge the country faced after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with a forceful, purposeful foreign policy that ended years of drift and half measures. He argues that under his leadership, the United States is finally prosecuting an all-out war against terrorism and enlisting a ìcoalition of the willingî to help in this effort. ìThis isnít a matter of intelligence and law enforcementóthis is a matter of war. The enemy declared war on the United States of America, and war is what they got,î Bush said in a speech this spring in Michigan. Bush also frequently touts his 2002 national security plan, which pledged that the United States would go on the offensive against terrorism and would even wage preventive wars to eliminate pressing threats to the country. Bush has said America would like to work with other nations but is willing to act alone to protect its interests. Kerry brings a substantial foreign policy record to the presidential campaign. A decorated Vietnam War veteran and a member of the U.S. Senate since 1985, Kerry is a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In the presidential campaign, one of Kerryís main themes is that the United States should embrace a ìbold, progressive internationalismî that works with other nations to confront ìinsidious dangers that can mount over the next years and decades, dangers that span the spectrum from the denial of democracy, to destructive weapons, endemic poverty and epidemic disease.î In a major foreign policy speech this spring at Westminster College in Missouri, Kerry said the United States does its best when it is ìrespected around the world, not feared.î Regarding Iraq, Kerry said the United Statesís central challenge is to get the worldís major powers, such as the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China, to join it in a political coalition to help Iraqi authorities with the transfer of sovereignty on June 30. Kerry said a broad international coalition, working through NATO, should be assembled to shore up security in Iraq. ìI think for the first time in over three decades, since the race between George McGovern and Richard Nixon in 1972, we are likely to have a major foreign policy, national security debate in a presidential election,î said Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. ìIt might be difficult to get to the real substance,î Gelb cautioned. ìDemocrats are going to accuse Bush of unilateralism and arrogance and the Republicans are going to accuse Kerry of being weak on defense and terrorism.î James Thurber, a political science professor at American University, said he is convinced that the 2004 race for the presidency will turn on a blend of domestic and international issuesóand unforeseen events. ìThe presidential campaign will be about Iraq, homeland security, and the economy and a lot of events that no one can really anticipate or control between now and November,î he said. Thurber said one wildcard issue is the political impact of another terrorist attack on the United States before the November election. ìIf there is another attack on the U.S. before the election, God forbid, there is simply no way of knowing how it will affect the campaign,î he said. ìMy own guess is that it could have a ërally round the presidentí effect, but we just donít know.î John Shaw is a contributing writer for The Washington Diplomat.