Monday, August 8, 2011 - 2:03 PM

Back in May, we did a quick round-up of the foreign policy and national security positions of the 2012 Republican field. Since then, some candidates -- Mitch Daniels and Mike Huckabee -- have dropped out, some -- Newt Gingrich -- have seen their fortunes fall dramatically, and one -- Texas Governor Rick Perry -- has emerged as a surprisingly compelling possible contender. As many commentators have noted, Perry comes without the liabilities plaguing much of the Republican field. His record is unquestionably conservative, unlike Mitt Romney. He's personable and charismatic, unlike Tim Pawlenty. After this weekend's prayer rally, attended by more than 30,000, he looks like a more formidable candidate than Michele Bachmann or Rick Santorum to appeal to evangelical voters.
But what does Perry think about the world? He hasn't made that many statements on foreign policy, but we can gather some indications from the people he's taking advice from. Perry has held meetings with former Bush administration officials including Doug Feith and William Luti, as well as Shadow Government contributor Dan Blumenthal. Former Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld has also reporteldy played a role in organizing his national national security briefings. This would seem to indicate that Perry is closer in outlook to the neoconservatism of the Bush adminsitration than the less interventionist approach of Tea Party leaders like Michele Bachmann and Rand Paul. Indeed, a source at the briefings told the National Review that Perry does not have “the neo-isolationism that you might expect from certain people [close to] the Tea Party.” (As if trying to complete the Bush White House circa 2002 vibe of his pre-campaign, Perry has also met with former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, who came away from the meeting with the impression that Perry will run.)
As governor, Perry as made visits to China, Mexico, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Qatar, Turkey, France and Sweden. Not surprisingly for a Texan, his thoughts on national security have mostly been directed across the Rio Grande. Last year, for instance, he suggested that the U.S. may need to deploy troops in Mexico to control the drug violence in the border region. Perry also defied the requests of the Mexian government, the Obama administration, the International Court of Justice, and Bush in July when Texas proceeded with the execution of a Mexican citizen.
Perry has recently waded into Middle Eastern politics as well. In May, he criticized Obama's Middle East speech, saying it "continues a misguided policy of alienating our traditional allies, in this case Israel, one of our strongest partners in the war on terror. As someone who has visited Israel numerous times, I know that it is impracticable to revert to the 1967 lines." Perry has also called on the Justice department to prosecute Americans who take part in the Gaza flotilla.
Perry's most detailed explanation of his foreign policy views may come in his recent book, Fed Up: Our Fight To Save America From Washington:
We are now confronted with the rise of new economic and military powerhouses in China and India, as well as a Russia that is increasingly aggressive and troublesome to its neighbors and former satellite nations that are struggling to maintain their relatively newfound independence. There is no reason to believe that armed conflict with any major power is imminen, but the world is rapidly changing, and the United States must be prepared for the ramifications of shifting balances of power.
North Korea and Iran, in contrast, are utterly unpredictable an do present an imminent threat with their nuclear ambitions. [...] Leftists in Latin America and threatening democracy, and Hugo Chavez is harboring communist rebels in Venezuela. All of these issues require our attention and investment in defense capabilities.
In light of these threats, Perry feels the U.S. defense budget has been dangerously eroded as a result of the "explosion of entitlement spending." He's also not a big fan of the Russia reset:
...it was a slap in the face to a number of our allies. As a Wall Street Journal article put it, "Some prominent figures in the region, such as former Polish President Lech Walesa, worried the new U.S. administration was turning away from its traditional allies in Central Europe to placate Russia." But there is good news for those who prefer our foreign policy be popular among the European elite, because NATO's secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, welcomed the U.S. policy shift, saying it was his "clear impression that the American plan on missile defense will involve NATO... to a higher degree in the future." Surely we can't be serious?
(Why the former president of Poland -- even a historically significant one -- is a "traditional ally" who should not be offended, but the secretary general of a defense alliance of which the United States was a co-founder is a figure worthy only of disdain is a little bit unclear.)
In other words, Perry seems to tick all the boxes of a conventional Republican defense hawk. Whether that will work in a very unconventional campaign season remains to be seen.
I'm not sure that's the word I would use.
Gov. Perry raises in fairly dramatic form a fundamental question for the Republican Party: what is the legacy of the last Republican President, and how will it be reflected in a future Republican administration? Now, this is one of those questions that can't be answered by taking it entirely at face value. What I mean by that is Perry, like other GOP aspirants to the White House, must get the nomination first. This requires aggressive appeals to the Republican voters most violently antagonistic to President Obama, appeals that may or may not reflect Perry's real views.
If they do reflect Perry's true views, one is drawn to a fairly clear conclusion. Gov. Perry thinks George W. Bush was a great President. Perry's foreign policy will be Bush's foreign policy, with the same objectives, run by many of the same people. Evidently, this means people from Bush's first term, not the people who struggled to do damage control throughout most of his second. Perry will run, and if elected would govern, as a Bush Republican.
The GOP must decide if this is what it really wants from its Presidential nominee. Bush, after all, was more unpopular for a longer period of time than any President since the invention of modern public opinion polling -- and this was before the financial crisis and economic collapse of late 2008. A very large component of his unpopularity was his foreign policy, particularly the wayward adventure in Iraq. Perry's apparent determination to pick up where Bush left off in foreign and national security affairs is not an obvious political winner.
To Americans who believe Bush was a very great President, Perry will be just the man, but most Americans don't really believe that. For Perry to be appealing to them, Obama would have to become very much more unpopular than he is -- as unpopular, say, as Bush was at this time three years ago.
if they do reflect true views, one is drawn to a fairly clear conclusion. Gov. Perry thinks George W. Bush was a great President. Perry's foreign policy will be Bush's foreign policy, with the same objectives, run by many of the same people. Evidently, this means people from Bush's first term, not the uçak biletipeople who struggled to do damage control throughout most of his second. Perry will run, and if elected would govern, as a Bush Republican.
Why is this guy considered a serious candidate for President? Does he really have any credentials that warrant it? Some in Texas are calling him the teflon governor because the current economic problems in his state do not appear to be sticking to him.
Texas legislature is currently working to close a projected $25 Billion two year state budget shortfall. They have proposed massive cuts to spending on education, state health care, and other programs. They have borrowed $4Billion from the state's "rainy day" fund. They are actually considering dropping medicaid altogether.
In 2005, the legislature cut school property taxes by one-third and expanded the tax on business to make up the difference - it did not work as the business tax has produced much less than the property tax did. In addition, lawmakers there failed to anticipate the shortfall in sales tax receipts that would occur in a recession. Texas currently ranks 50th in state per capita spending, so they have less "fat" to cut from the budget than any other state.
Despite the problems in his state, he has time to visit China, Turkey, Iraq, Israel, etc? This was the governor who bragged that his state had billions in surplus when he ran for re-election last time. If that was so, where did the surplus go? And why did he not anticipate it and take steps with the legislature dominated by his party to deal with it? Yes, that is right, the Republicans have controlled the governorship and the legislature in Texas since 1995. So, why is this guy considered a candidate for the White House?
What was the name of that other Texas governor...
... a dozen years ago who responded to a reporter's question about who were the people living in Greece ... after a long pause, and with a quizzical, hopeful expression, "Grecians?" And rode that level of foreign affairs knowledge into the White House?
Foreign affairs in Texas seem in remarkable degree to be between Austin and the other 49 states.
(4)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE