Don't listen to presidential candidates on foreign policy.
So why is Perry warning against military adventurism? Like Bush, Perry is seeking the presidential nomination of a Republican Party divided on foreign policy. President Barack Obamaâ??s military interventions, like Clintonâ??s before him, have newly hatched Republican doves in Congress.Bush had to contend with Pat Buchanan, a conservative candidate who opposed a large military role overseas, first in the Republican primaries and later as a third-party candidate. Bush wanted to appeal to Buchananâ??s supporters. This time around, Perry is running against fellow Texan Ron Paul, an even more outspoken foe of foreign wars.
Under this scenario, the easiest thing to do is stress areas of agreement among Republicans: No U.S. troops serving under foreign command. Foreign policy based on vital national interests. Secure the nation and act according to our strategic interests.
Other than the veiled implication that the current Democratic administration isnâ??t doing those things, such statements leave a lot of room for interpretation. As a result, Perryâ??s foreign policy speeches are no more useful in predicting what he would do as president than Bushâ??s were. - W. James Antle III
I think it's fair to say this about almost any candidate capable of winning a general election, including President Obama. It's better to look at the consensus that informs elite members of Washington's foreign policy class for cues as to how a potential candidate would govern. There are, to be sure, some divergences between the two political camps at this rarefied level, but they're a lot narrower than political rhetoric would suggest.
