In which direction, if any, is the GOP moving on foreign policy and national security? In the next presidential nomination fight, what kinds of rhetoric and what kinds of promises will candidates likely need to make to win support?
IANAC, but it seems to me that the Hagel hearings indicate neoconservative hawkery will be the prevailing GOP foreign policy doctrine for years to come.
I think it'll be interesting to see how Sen. Rand Paul tries to accommodate his views to the prevailing wisdom of the contemporary GOP.
Part of Rand's estimation seems to be that conservatives are more interested in political red meat than in a truly hawkish foreign policy. You don't really see it in that policy speech, but he generally does deliver a lot more Limbaugh-esque rhetoric than his father ever did.
I think the Republican Party will gradually move away from neoconservatism to a less interventionist position, in the direction of Rand Paul but not as far as he goes. This will be partly due to the declining influence of aging warriors like Sen. McCain, and partly due to the desire of many Republicans to hold down federal spending, including defense spending. Going ahead with the sequester on March 1 would be a good start in this direction.
IANAC, but it seems to me that the Hagel hearings indicate neoconservative hawkery will be the prevailing GOP foreign policy doctrine for years to come.
ReplyDeleteI think it'll be interesting to see how Sen. Rand Paul tries to accommodate his views to the prevailing wisdom of the contemporary GOP.
Last week Rand delivered a foreign policy address aimed at doing just that:
Deletehttp://reason.com/archives/2013/02/06/containment-and-radical-islam/singlepage
Part of Rand's estimation seems to be that conservatives are more interested in political red meat than in a truly hawkish foreign policy. You don't really see it in that policy speech, but he generally does deliver a lot more Limbaugh-esque rhetoric than his father ever did.
I think the Republican Party will gradually move away from neoconservatism to a less interventionist position, in the direction of Rand Paul but not as far as he goes. This will be partly due to the declining influence of aging warriors like Sen. McCain, and partly due to the desire of many Republicans to hold down federal spending, including defense spending. Going ahead with the sequester on March 1 would be a good start in this direction.
ReplyDelete