Joe Biden Speaks at CAPAF
| By Andrew Connelly - May 20th, 2008 at 4:12 pm EDT |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
In an event hosted by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, Senator Joe Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, rebutted recent foreign policy speeches by Senator McCain and President Bush.
In Bush's address to the Israeli Knesset he castigated those who would engage with the likes of Iran, likening them to the appeasers that eased Hitler's ascent to European dominance before World War II. For many this was a thinly veiled criticism of Barack Obama who has recommended engagement with Iran as the best initial tactic in resolving American disagreements with the regime. Senator Biden lambasted Bush for politicising foreign policy and believes that the only casualty was America's standing abroad, not Obama's at home. For Biden, the comments were part of a tactic to discredit options not pursued by Bush, options which might have avoided the strengthening of Iran and Hezbollah; Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan; and the increasing lack of stability in the Middle East. If we don't talk with countries like Iran, Biden said, there are only two other options - maintenance of the status quo, or war. Neither of these are really acceptable.
Biden made three last major points.
We must eschew two of the Bush Administrations favourite policies if we are to see progress in the region. First there should be no preconditions for talks with Iran. How are we to negotiate on the major issues if we unrealistically demand that they concede on them before we even start? Secondly the idea of regime change must be rejected. Iraq has proven the ineffectiveness of this tactic (not to mention many more examples throughout America's cold war history, Europe's colonial past etc.). Biden made the case that by hanging this threat over countries like Iran we drive them to seek powerful weapons and regional influence in order to make such an American initiative more difficult.
A large element of Bush's rationale for staying in Iraq is that withdrawal would allow a resurgence of Al-Qaeda activity and Iranian influence in the country and embolden the former in Afghanistan. Biden actually believes the opposite. Withdrawal should cause both to lose support over ordinary Iraqis and the latter over the Iraqi government. Furthermore, America will be able to strengthen its activities in Afghanistan, pushing more troops and resources into the battle against a Taliban and Al-Qaeda that lost a major recruiting tool after America left Iraq.
Finally, Biden agrees that the risks of drawing down in Iraq are debatable, that it is difficult to know with a degree of certainty what will happen. He is convinced, however, that the costs of staying are undeniable, that if America remains it will spend billions of dollars and give up hundreds and thousands of lives. That is a heavy cost that must not be paid.
In Bush's address to the Israeli Knesset he castigated those who would engage with the likes of Iran, likening them to the appeasers that eased Hitler's ascent to European dominance before World War II. For many this was a thinly veiled criticism of Barack Obama who has recommended engagement with Iran as the best initial tactic in resolving American disagreements with the regime. Senator Biden lambasted Bush for politicising foreign policy and believes that the only casualty was America's standing abroad, not Obama's at home. For Biden, the comments were part of a tactic to discredit options not pursued by Bush, options which might have avoided the strengthening of Iran and Hezbollah; Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan; and the increasing lack of stability in the Middle East. If we don't talk with countries like Iran, Biden said, there are only two other options - maintenance of the status quo, or war. Neither of these are really acceptable.
Biden made three last major points.
We must eschew two of the Bush Administrations favourite policies if we are to see progress in the region. First there should be no preconditions for talks with Iran. How are we to negotiate on the major issues if we unrealistically demand that they concede on them before we even start? Secondly the idea of regime change must be rejected. Iraq has proven the ineffectiveness of this tactic (not to mention many more examples throughout America's cold war history, Europe's colonial past etc.). Biden made the case that by hanging this threat over countries like Iran we drive them to seek powerful weapons and regional influence in order to make such an American initiative more difficult.
A large element of Bush's rationale for staying in Iraq is that withdrawal would allow a resurgence of Al-Qaeda activity and Iranian influence in the country and embolden the former in Afghanistan. Biden actually believes the opposite. Withdrawal should cause both to lose support over ordinary Iraqis and the latter over the Iraqi government. Furthermore, America will be able to strengthen its activities in Afghanistan, pushing more troops and resources into the battle against a Taliban and Al-Qaeda that lost a major recruiting tool after America left Iraq.
Finally, Biden agrees that the risks of drawing down in Iraq are debatable, that it is difficult to know with a degree of certainty what will happen. He is convinced, however, that the costs of staying are undeniable, that if America remains it will spend billions of dollars and give up hundreds and thousands of lives. That is a heavy cost that must not be paid.
!
Comments are closed for this post.