Centerfield

Petty Primary Squabbles -- and the Big Picture

At the start of this presidential primary season, when looking at the full range of contenders on both sides, I tended to conclude that there were three reasonable choices. My three choices are based largely on foreign policy, because I think our position in the world and the way we manage the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are critical unresolved issues. I zeroed in on the three candidates with the most compelling combinations of experience in the foreign policy arena and some apparent sense of balance or judgment on those issues.

The top spot clearly goes to Joe Biden, in my opinion, who is long gone at this point and never really had much of a chance.

The other two -- Hillary Clinton and John McCain -- are both live options, and McCain now has the inside track to the Republican nomination.

There's a fair amount of tension in these choices. I'm looking for a candidate who will draw a certain conclusion regarding Iraq policy, among a few other things. The simple conclusion is that our policy in Iraq should be focused on stability. Given the limited but significant gains from the troop surge, we should be pulling together all the diplomatic, political, economic, and military resources it takes to try to force a political settlement in Iraq, which might then become the basis of long-term stability. Of course, it might not become the basis for stability too. We may fail in Iraq, regardless of what we do. But I think the position we're in, right at this moment, calls for a vigorous effort.

Part of that effort can involve -- and perhaps should involve -- a drawdown of U.S. forces. But the drawdown should be calibrated for Iraqi success, perhaps part of the pressure we put on them to make political progress, but not so abrupt that it destabilizes the society and helps precipitate a downward spiral.

In the early part of the campaign, both Biden and Hillary seemed to sort of get this. Biden has a detailed plan for Iraq that he developed with Leslie Gelb, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. Hillary talked about "the responsibility gene" when the subject of Iraq came up. She gave the clear impression that she was not looking for the quickest way out, nor the most complete withdrawal, and she said those things in front of audiences of primary voters who very much wanted to hear a different message. It all seemed rather bold and brave to me, and her demeanor seemed balanced and even-tempered and comforting.

More recently, as we approached the primaries and then started voting, both Biden and Hillary ran into problems. Biden because he got rejected by the voters. And Hillary because she shifted rhetorical gears dramatically and began talking just like the other "withdrawal first" Democrats. The pressure of the Obama surge seems to have gotten to her.

On the other side of the aisle, we see tensions that are run parallel the Democratic ones. The ones from the Democrats are bourne out of an over-emphasis on quick withdrawal, while the Republican tensions come from an inability to discuss any sort of timetable as part of an overall strategy.

I view McCain as one of the three responsible choices in the field in spite of the fact that he's the candidate most committed to long-term military involvement. Listen closely enough to the way McCain talks about foreign policy, and you get the sense of a balanced, seasoned, and informed guy who is likely to make choices with careful deliberation. I get some of the same feeling from McCain that I do from Biden -- that he understands how to work the levers of American influence in the world, and that he will put serious effort into working with the international community.

That's what makes it hard to watch all these ongoing spats between candidates in the primaries. McCain says Romney's suggestion of even private timetables is tantamount to surrender, when our government very much needs to be setting concrete goals and holding the Iraqis to those goals. Romney actually has better ideas on Iraq policy than McCain. He just doesn't have the experience, and, more importantly, it's hard to decide how committed he can be to a solid strategy of any kind, given his pattern of policy chamelionism.

So I watch McCain hammering Romney for having better policy ideas, and I still support McCain. And I watch Hillary talking like Edwards, and I still support Hillary. Even though they're wrong on some important matters of substance, I can picture both of them actually leading in a responsible fashion. I don't believe McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years, nor do I believe Clinton will start a precipitous withdrawal within 60 days, as her latest statement suggests. I picture both of those candidates doing something closer to the right thing.

I also see Biden as significantly better than all of these guys. Even with his flaws as a candidate, I can't figure out how we let this guy go, given our critical immediate needs on the world stage.