ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC Political Researcher



'Conventional Washington' v. change

Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007 2:39 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: ,

From NBC's Mark Murray
In the wake of the criticism that Obama has received for saying he wouldn't use nuclear weapons to take out Al Qaeda in Pakistan -- and for his other recent controversial statements on foreign policy -- the Obama campaign has released a memo contrasting Obama's approach with the Washington Establishment's "broken way of doing things."

In the memo, Obama adviser Samantha Power -- the founding executive director of Harvard University's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy -- writes: "Over the last few weeks, Barack Obama has once again taken positions that challenge Washington’s conventional wisdom on foreign policy. And once again, pundits and politicians have leveled charges that are now bankrupt of credibility and devoid of the new ideas that the American people desperately want."

"On each point in the last few weeks, Barack Obama has called for a break from a broken way of doing things. On each point, he has brought fresh strategic thinking and common sense that break with the very conventional wisdom that has led us into Iraq."

Below is the entire memo...

August 3, 2007
To: Interested Parties
From: Samantha Power -- Founding Executive Director, Harvard University Carr Center for Human Rights Policy
Re: Conventional Washington versus the Change We Need

It was Washington’s conventional wisdom that led us into the worst strategic blunder in the history of US foreign policy.  The rush to invade Iraq was a position advocated by not only the Bush Administration, but also by editorial pages, the foreign policy establishment of both parties, and majorities in both houses of Congress.  Those who opposed the war were often labeled weak, inexperienced, and even naïve.

Barack Obama defied conventional wisdom and opposed invading Iraq. He did so at a time when some told him that doing so would doom his political future. He took that risk because he thought it essential that the United States “finish the fight with bin Laden and al Qaeda.” He warned that a “dumb war, a rash war” in Iraq would result in an “occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.”

Barack Obama was right; the conventional wisdom was wrong. And today, we see the consequences. Iraq is in chaos. According to the National Intelligence Estimate, the threat to our homeland from terrorist groups is “persistent and evolving.”  Al-Qaeda has a safe-haven in Pakistan. Iran has only grown stronger and bolder. The American people are less safe because of a rash war.

Over the last few weeks, Barack Obama has once again taken positions that challenge Washington’s conventional wisdom on foreign policy.  And once again, pundits and politicians have leveled charges that are now bankrupt of credibility and devoid of the new ideas that the American people desperately want.

On each point in the last few weeks, Barack Obama has called for a break from a broken way of doing things. On each point, he has brought fresh strategic thinking and common sense that break with the very conventional wisdom that has led us into Iraq.

Diplomacy: For years, conventional wisdom in Washington has said that the United States cannot talk to its adversaries because it would reward them.  Here is the result:

--The United States has not talked directly to Iran at a high level, and they have continued to build their nuclear weapons program, wreak havoc in Iraq, and support terror.
--The United States has not talked directly to Syria at a high level, and they have continued to meddle in Lebanon and support terror.
-- The United States did not talk to North Korea for years, and they were able to produce enough material for 6 to 8 more nuclear bombs.

By any measure, not talking has not worked. Conventional wisdom would have us continue this policy; Barack Obama would turn the page. He knows that not talking has made us look weak and stubborn in the world; that skillful diplomacy can drive wedges between your adversaries; that the only way to know your enemy is to take his measure; and that tough talk is of little use if you’re not willing to do it directly to your adversary.  Barack Obama is not afraid of losing a PR battle to a dictator – he’s ready to tell them what they don’t want to hear because that’s how tough, smart diplomacy works, and that’s how American leaders have scored some of the greatest strategic successes in US history.

Barack Obama’s judgment is right; the conventional wisdom is wrong. We need a new era of tough, principled and engaged American diplomacy to deal with 21st century challenges.

Terrorist Sanctuaries: For years, we have given President Musharraf hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid, while deferring to his cautious judgment on how to take out high-level al Qaeda targets – including, most likely, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri. Here is the result: 

-- Bin Laden and Zawahiri – two men with direct responsibility for 9/11– remain at large.
-- Al Qaeda has trained and deployed hundreds of fighters worldwide from its sanctuary in northwest Pakistan.
-- Afghanistan is far less secure because the Taliban can strike across the border, and then return to safety in Pakistan.
 
By any measure, this strategy has not worked. Conventional wisdom would have us defer to Musharraf in perpetuity. Barack Obama wants to turn the page. If Musharraf is willing to go after the terrorists and stop the Taliban from using Pakistan as a base of operations, Obama would give him all of the support he needs. But Obama made clear that as President, if he had actionable intelligence about the whereabouts of al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan – and the Pakistanis continued to refuse to act against terrorists known to be behind attacks on American civilians – then he will use highly targeted force to do so.

Barack Obama’s judgment is right; the conventional wisdom is wrong. We need a new era that moves beyond the conventional wisdom that has brought us over-reliance on an unreliable dictator in Pakistan and an occupation of Iraq.

Nuclear Attacks on Terrorist Targets: For years, Washington’s conventional wisdom has held that candidates for President are judged not by their wisdom, but rather by their adherence to hackneyed rhetoric that make little sense beyond the Beltway. When asked whether he would use nuclear weapons to take out terrorist targets in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Barack Obama gave the sensible answer that nuclear force was not necessary, and would kill too many civilians. Conventional wisdom held this up as a sign of inexperience. But if experience leads you to make gratuitous threats about nuclear use – inflaming fears at home and abroad, and signaling nuclear powers and nuclear aspirants that using nuclear weapons is acceptable behavior, it is experience that should not be relied upon.

Barack Obama’s judgment is right. Conventional wisdom is wrong. It is wrong to propose that we would drop nuclear bombs on terrorist training camps in Pakistan, potentially killing tens of thousands of people and sending America’s prestige in the world to a level that not even George Bush could take it. We should judge presidential candidates on their judgment and their plans, not on their ability to recite platitudes.

Vision: American foreign policy is broken. It has been broken by people who supported the Iraq War, opposed talking to our adversaries, failed to finish the job with al Qaeda, and alienated the world with our belligerence. Yet conventional wisdom holds that people whose experience includes taking these positions are held up as examples of what America needs in times of trouble.

Barack Obama says we have to turn the page. We cannot afford any more of this kind of bankrupt conventional wisdom. He has laid out a foreign policy that is bold, clear, principled, and tailored for the 21st century. End a war we should never have fought, concentrate our resources against terrorists who threaten America. End the counter-productive policy of lumping together our adversaries and avoiding talking to our foes. End the era of politics that is all sound-bites and no substance, and offer the American people the change that they need.

Barack Obama’s judgment is right. It is conventional wisdom that has to change.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

This is as strong of a comeback as I could imagine. Power is terrific, thanks for posting the whole thing. Obama's team seems to be heeding (directly or not) your advice from this morning to get a hold of the narrative  before it becomes a real problem.
Could he really do worse than deferrment dick and the liar?
THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS!

the media seriously needs to apologize for their inexplicable headlines. this is a great response from the obama PR team and one that plugs all the "holes" people seem to be criticizing.
His comments are PRICELESS!!! Go Obama!!!
Wow!
Bravo...in one stroke Obama has labeled all of the other candidates as part of the Washington establishment. Let's see them wiggle out of that. Didn't they all vote for the war?
This is not a comeback.  It is an attempt to steer us away from the real fact that Senator Obama is woefully out of his league on foreign policy.  Destabilizing Pakistan would be the worst possible thing the U.S. could do.
Obama just won a vote.
This is a cogent, coherent and rational response to "conventional" wisdom in Washington and  in the press. I was wavering on Obama until he began elucidating his foreign policy vision.  Now I am firmly in his camp!
The beltway conventional wisdom and why Obama is a thorn in their side:


The beltway insiders were cheerleading the rush to go to war in Iraq. How many times have these so called "experts" got it wrong? You know, how many of them have children serving in Iraq? I'm tired of these fat cat "experts" telling us what is right. They have been wrong so many times that in another setting, they would have been utterly shunned and ignored.

The American people are waking up to the fact that these "experts" and their buddies in Washington and the press are not worth their six figure salaries.  


All I have to say is that I think it's great that Obama is not willing to go around setting off nuclear bombs in other soverign countries.  Also, Clinton said that the nuclear option should never be taken off the table.  Does this mean she would be willing to blow up Washington D.C. if that is where Osama Bin Laden was hiding
That was a smart response to Obama's challengers.
I'm sorry, but haven't we had enough of "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" attitude from the current President? I much prefer a thoughtful, measured approach to a change in foreign diplomacy over time to Obama's one-eighty.
brilliant
Obama sounds different.  He sounds like a true American President.  The potential for us to put this country back on the right track is staring us in the face.  We just have to reject the naysayers, the cynics, the powerful few who love to keep us divided and stupid, and join together to turn the freakin' page!  
The political system is so wack that his common sense seems brilliant!!
Conventional Washington was changed when bush/cheney took office. Now an administration can be above the law. It can start a war, invade and occupy any country without it being a threat to us. It can appoint justices and officials that are supportive of only their ideas. It can conceal documents and e-mails that might prove illegal activities. It can scoff at and ignor court orders. It does not have to answer to the people they represent. It can ignor health issues, safety issues, envirenment issues. It can torture prisoners of war against international laws and kill inocent people. It can keep high ranking officials in office, after they are proven liers, conficted of purgery. The vice president can shoot someone and wait until the next day to call police, after the alcohol wears off his breath. Oh conventional Washington is now gone.
This memo hit the nail on the head. Enough is quite enough.
Bravo....Bravo to Obama and his team.
The media seems to only put what they think will
get the attention from the public.
If they would have  let Obama copmlete what he was saying they may
have gotten a clear picture of what the gut was trying to tell them.

Let the man speak what is true, it is a time for a change  in politics. I am sick and tired of the politicans ( Republican)telling the American people what is good for them put all that they say is good to a vote to the American people and let us decide.
And Yes they all voted for the war...Lets see them worm their way out of this..

Thanks you and AMEN.............
This is the message and content that needs to be conveyed everytime Clinton snarks and says she thought Obama's campaign was about Hope, not attacks.  It isn't about attacking alone, it is about conveying this type of message.  It is principled, it is decisive, it does not follow polling and watchgroups.  And Obama has every right to throw elbows when his message is misconstrued by the others.  The whole, "I thought his campaign was about Hope" is glib, niave and old.  Senator Obama, you have my vote.
This is the message and content that needs to be conveyed everytime Clinton snarks and says she thought Obama's campaign was about Hope, not attacks.  It isn't about attacking alone, it is about conveying this type of message.  It is principled, it is decisive, it does not follow polling and watchgroups.  And Obama has every right to throw elbows when his message is misconstrued by the others.  The whole, "I thought his campaign was about Hope" is glib, niave and old.  Senator Obama, you have my vote.
I must say spectacular argument. Power nailed down all the pertinent points in clear fashion. This is one of the most reasoned out rationales I've heard in my (brief) lifetime.
The problem with conventional 'wisdom' is that it's defending an Empire.
This country is pending more on 'defense' (ie.e the war machine) than all other countries in the world, combined.

Conventional candidates for President have to talk tought to prove they're willing to kill 'darkies' to protect and expand the empire.

It's odd (and unmnentioned in the media) that everyone taking shots at Obama either voted for the Iraq War (thereby becomming 'experienced') or supports the war, now ('realistic').

Don't expect the MSM to ask them to justify their votes for war.

Why doesn't Obama do this.
It really is time for TV advertising in the early primary states.
The Democratic party insiders have rigged the primary schedule for Hillary.
They've bunched the primaraies early so that big money counts.
They didn't expect that Hillary wouldn't be the biggest recipient of contributions) !!

Advertise now, Obama.
Start pointing out positions on Iraq.
Biden, Clinton, Dodd and Edwards should be asked to explain their votes.
Richardson should be asked why he was so pro-war.

Obama '08
Let's end the 'culture of corruption'
Once again we have a very stupid and disrepectful person talking fot a candidate for the President of the United States.  He is a doomsayer and ignorant person who has no place in politics.  If he gets to be elected it will be the worst day every for our country as he is full or ideas but very very short short on speciifcs...it is all right to say this or that..but danmn it back it up with specifics or else we will take care of this issue ourselves.
I posted on this issue at my site.  Sorry, but irrespective of why he or you might think of the current policy, this statement doesn't even come close to explaining the disaster and catastrophy that would ensure upon an actual land invasion of a country of 170 with nuclear weapons.  Ralph Peters recently outlined the huge military effort that this would involve along with explaining why it would break the U.S. military.

Obama should go back to the drawing board.  Chest butting isn't the right way to approach this region of the world.  You think Iraq has been hard?  Right.  Try an invasion and occupation of Pakistan.
I think we have a man for the people and can think in terms of 21st century and Cold War and post Cold War...Good luck responding to this one Team Hillary (Captain Hillary, Cheerleaders Biden, Dood, Richardson)
Obama's team seem to be quick and nimble in responding to the pundits..right and left..he will need this ability to escape the 'labels' to come.Good work team Obama!
Finally, a candidate striving to be a leader instead of a politician.

Go Obama Go!!! Just when you think they've put him in a corner---he comes a swinging!!!
Bravo, Obama! While all the other candidates and their corporate funded/influenced media partners continue to try and "out hawk" one another and garner the lion's share of the coverage for espousing the same old tired and disproven (I might add) approaches to government...Obama stands above the pack with new and refreshingly welcome ideas that are long overdue. All the nay sayers need to stop and think before opening their mouths that they ALL got it wrong on Iraq and many other issues. Obama was correct from the beginning. Again, Bravo, Obama!!
Jim Harvey, Washington, DC
He is so full of it. Obama, you supported the war in Iraq also! You voted for every single Iraq Emergency Supplemental Bill when you were in the senate, except for the last one, conveniently after you announced your run for the presidency. Does somebody need to show him his voting record because he must be suffering from amnesia.

Nobody said that they wouldn't talk to leaders. I don't understand where he is creating this corollary. As stated before, most of the things that he outlined in his "Foreign Policy Speech" are already taking place or in progress in Congress, but I guess he hasn't been there long enough to notice. If Obama is soo against the "conventional Washington thinking", then why did he run for the US Senate?? Why didn't he just run for president as a state senator?
As an observer of the U.S. political scene(and not a disinterested one at that, since my daugher lives in the U.S.), I have to say Obama has uttered the first original American political thinking in a very long time.
The prospect of actually engaging one's adversaries rather than bomb the hell out of them? That doesn't seem overly radical to me.
Not using a nuclear bomb on populated area in an attempt to kill some terrorists? I don't know but it seems to me several thousand civilians as collateral damage would not actually enhance the U.S. image as a world leader.
The simple fact of the matter is that the world is too complex and interconnected for any state to be the world wide sheriff, and the world ain't Dodge.
Maybe some people should really consider someone like Obama who actually thinks about the issues and isn't afraid to say there may be other solutions than shoot first.
And THAT'S why he's going to be the next president! Wow, I don't know about you all, but it's reading about that sort of vision and integrity in one of our candidates that makes me really proud to be a democrat.
Its time for a change! I love what Mr.Obama stands for he's saying what most americans are saying but our leaders are not willing to change, because that might implies that they were wrong. pride over doing whats right i hope the people call our leader on how this present course is taking america is down!
Please, no one will even read past the first line. How is having a memo written and issued by an advisor from Harvard University going to change people's perceptions? In the past two weeks Obama has only reinforced my initial misgivings about him. Why do all you Obama supporters blame the media - HE is the one who keeps sticking his foot in his mouth. And if you aren't savvy enough to deal with the media, you're toast!  That being said, let's not take our eye off the ball and get sidetracked - our goal is the same - to remove the Republicans from office before our country is irretrievably broken.
Americans should accept the kind of change Obama is advocating. After all the conventional way has brought one full circle with the worst results one could imagine.
Obama's views are very reasonable and straightforward -- he is saying what he thinks, not what presidential candidates "should say", or will prevent him from being open to criticism by other candidates. His thinking is just the kind of thinking we need to make progress in foreign affairs.
All relevant nails hit squarely on the head.  I love it!!!
CST- read the memo again- if he has ACTIONABLE intelligence he would send small specialized forces. In other words, no I'm not going to let them just sit around and play cards if I know we can take them out. He's not going in with thousands of troops and bombs as with Iraq, he's talking a very specific region in a specific circumstance.
Hopefully Americans will realize the wisdom in this.  
"Tough" is more than military might, but it takes knowledge of history, current events, and foresight to understand this.  Perhaps something good will come out of the catastrophe of Iraq - just because we "can" attack does not mean we should.
This memo proves that there is only one person with any vision or wisdom on the Democratic side.  I had not made up my decision until today -- Obama will have my primary vote, and also my choice in the presidential election.
Finally, someone has articulated exactly what all of Hillary's "experience" really means. This man has my vote.
This is no comeback. This is just hogwash to cover up Obama's serious lack of skill when it comes to foreign policy. In no way, will I vote for him. I voting proudly for Hillary Clinton!
Hmm, he just won some respect from someone who thought he was an empty suit.
Outstanding, simply outstanding; Americans do need a fresh approach and Obama seems to be the leader who is willing and able to take the necessary steps.  Nuclear devices have become so sophisticated that they can be carried in a luggage bag.  No longer can we rely on bombastic behavior to convey the concerns of the American people, we need to be able to use diplomacy and work in a concerted effort to work on issue of mutual interest with other countries.
The "I know more than anybody", Mr B. Hussein Obama, should think more and speak less. His robust language is a thin veneer for an agenda not yet revealed.
my comment or rating has been received.  However, due to caching and moderation, it may not be displayed right away.  That makes no sense to me.  If you ask for a comment and one writes one to you, then why does it have to be considered for moderation.  What is this a Democratic web only???
If Senator Obama continues to give such honest, fearless, no-compromise responses to the Washington establishment, then he just won my vote. If a country with almost unlimited traditional, sophisticated weaponry cannot do away with the threat of using nuclear weapons, then what right does it have to ask the same of countries who are NOT that strong in traditional weaponry and NEED nuclear weapons to secure their borders?? It is MADNESS to think that America needs nukes to succeed against terrorists.

Someone has to stop and think about where nuclear weapons have taken the human race and what they have really achieved.

Kudos Obama!
Indeed, it is real cohesive, well integrated reply to the current ignorant attacks not only by perverted interests but even by Clinton Camp.  It won't work Hillary, please be positive in your response.  You might win with your credentials rather than pointing your opponent weaknesses (in fact those are the very strengths)
Regards
Obama is lacking in his foreign policy and his stance on e Military actions. He is will NOT strike against those who strike at us. In one of his debates, he was asked, what will he do as president if America was under attack? His first response was “I’ll make sure that our first responders have the necessary equipment to do there job.” He’s a coward. You strike first and you strike hard.  


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=303197

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google