I have not yet finished reading James Traub's NYT Magazine article on Obama's foreign policy team. The article's focus on Obama's choice of advisers, however, I am somewhat reluctant to endorse. It's terrific that a group of younger foreign policy wonks all think Obama is really smart and capable, with a background uniquely befitting of an American President in an globalized world. That some of these advisers (e.g. Tony Lake) shared the Senator's prescience in outspokenly opposing the Iraq War is an added plus. It is good to know that Obama is not alone in his campaign plane in having exercised sound judgment on the defining foreign policy issue of the decade.
That said, once a foreign policy wonk affiliates herself with a particular campaign, she gains a vested interest in the candidate's electoral success - an Obama victory will likely mean high-profile appointments for everyone of his supporters quoted in the article. Without suggesting any insincerity, I always wonder whether this interest biases a wonk's public appraisal of the candidate's abilities. Nearly impossible to determine.
With that reservation in mind, anyone who liked Traub's article (e.g. Matt Yglesias) ought to watch Charlie Rose's interview with Samantha Power of the Kennedy School. She's listed among Obama's top advisers, and if her acumen is at all representative, than this group surely deserves a shot at shaping America's foreign relations. Power makes Madelaine Albright look positively daft.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment