Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

An AEI President? Plus: The President’s Reading List

Print Friendly

An AEI President?

When George W. Bush took office in 2001, many commentators noted the high degree of influence in the administration of one particular rightist faction—the neoconservatives. A sign of the group’s clout was the large number of "scholars" from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) who were tapped to serve in the administration, a point highlighted by President Bush during a January 2003 speech at AEI celebrating the life and work of neocon progenitor Irving Kristol. After commending the institute for having "some of the finest minds in our nation," the president added: "You do such good work that my administration has borrowed 20 such minds."

The folks at AEI, however, don’t seem content with merely having their "minds" fill mid-level posts, as the early campaign for the 2008 presidency reveals. Three potential Republican candidates closely tied to the institute have been heavily promoted by neoconservatives, including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who championed, along with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), an AEI-supported "surge" strategy during a speech at the institute in early 2007. McCain has been closely affiliated with many neoconservative leading lights like William Kristol and supported a number of neocon-led advocacy campaigns, including the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. In a late 2006 article for Foreign Policy, AEI fellow Joshua Muravchik promoted McCain’s candidacy, arguing that he was the sort of leader "who could prosecute the war on terror vigorously." He added: "As for vice presidential candidates, how about Condoleezza Rice or even Joe Lieberman? Lieberman says he’s still a Democrat. But there is no place for him in that party. Like every one of us, he is a refugee."

Then there is Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House who is currently a fellow at AEI. His hints that he might run have many neocons salivating, including writers at the Weekly Standard. In a glowing review of a speech Gingrich gave last September in which he argued that the United States was fighting World War III, the Standard opined: "His rivals should take note. The first speech of the 2008 presidential campaign was delivered on the fifth anniversary of September 11, 2001."

More recently, Fred Thompson—former senator from Tennessee, TV actor known for his role in Law and Order, and visiting fellow at AEI specializing in national security issues—has hinted that he too might run. As Tom Barry points out in a recent Right Web analysis, "The Conservative Credibility Test," many AEI-types have long been excited about Thompson’s political potential, with outlets like the Standard pushing him as a replacement for John Bolton at the United Nations and discussing at length what a Thompson presidency would look like.

The Conservative Credibility Test
By Tom Barry | April 3, 2007

The Republicans may have found a leading man for the presidential run in lawyer/thespian/senator Fred Thompson, but his ties to Corporate America and the neoconservatives may dissuade many grassroots conservatives from giving him their vote. Read full story.

SEE ALSO

Right Web Profile: Sen. John McCain
During a recent trip to Baghdad, Senator McCain saw a serene open market that he argued proved the "surge" was working; merchants there saw something different—one abnormal day of heavy security in the form of hovering attack choppers, U.S. sharpshooters on rooftops, armored Humvees, and an entire company of U.S. soldiers.

Right Web Profile: Newt Gingrich
The former Speaker of the House and current senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, Gingrich has been threatening for months to officially enter the presidential race. Few but the neocons seem excited about such a possibility.

Reading on the Right
By Jim Lobe | April 5, 2007

A slew of right-wing books have turned up on the nightstands of Bush administration officials. What is remarkable about these books is—much like the cherry-picked and manipulated intelligence stove-piped to Bush in the run-up to the Iraq War—both their extraordinary ideological narrowness and their utility in the pursuit of a neoconservative agenda, especially in the Middle East. Read full story.

Right Web Profile: Bernard Lewis
Princeton University professor Bernard Lewis’ book What Went Wrong?, which details the "decline" of Muslim civilization, is regarded by some as a kind of handbook to the war against Islamic terrorism. And his "Lewis Doctrine," the idea of imposing a secular society on Islamic countries, became a key idée fixe of the Bush administration and its neocon allies, helping spur the disastrous Iraq War and dreams of remaking the Middle East.

Right Web Profile: Eliot Cohen
In his 2002 book Supreme Command, Eliot Cohen, counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and a high-profile neoconservative academic based at Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies, argued that civilian leaders make better strategic decisions than military leaders. The book, which was paraded about publicly by the likes of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney during the lead up to the Iraq War, seemed intended to preempt efforts by military brass to intervene in administration war plans.

ALSO NEW ON RIGHT WEB

The Bluster Offensive
By Gareth Porter | April 10, 2007

Bush’s tough talk on Iran now looks much more like a cover for a decision to reverse his earlier policy of disdaining the need to reach an understanding with Tehran. Read full story.

Right Web Profile: Tom Tancredo
It’s official—Tancredo, the rabidly anti-immigration representative from Colorado, is running for president. His chances of success might be slim, but his culture-war rhetoric could push the presidential race to the right.

LETTERS

IRC encourages feedback and comments. Send letters to rightweb@irc-online.org. IRC reserves the right to edit comments for clarity and brevity. Be sure to include your full name. Thank you.

IRC Global Good Neighbor Initiative

The initiative to promote a global good neighbor ethic as the guiding vision of U.S. foreign policy was launched by the International Relations Center (IRC) in May 2005 with events in New York City and Washington, DC. Consider adding your voice to the cause. And check out this new GGN video.

If you would like to see our variety of free ezines and listservs, please go to: http://www.irc-online.org/lists/.
To be removed from this list, please email rightweb@irc-online.org with “unsubscribe Right Web.”

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Although sometimes characterized as a Republican “maverick” for his bipartisan forays into domestic policy, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is one of the Senate’s more vocal hawks.


Former CIA director Michael Hayden, a stalwart advocate of the Bush-era policies on torture and warrantless wiretapping, has been a vocal critic of Donald Trump


The former GOP presidential candidate and Speaker of the House has been a vociferous proponent of the idea that the America faces an existential threat from “Islamofascists.”


David Albright is the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, a non-proliferation think tank whose influential analyses of nuclear proliferation issues in the Middle East have been the source of intense disagreement and debate.


A right-wing Christian and governor of Kansas, Brownback previously served in the U.S. Senate, where he gained a reputation as a leading social conservative as well as an outspoken “pro-Israel” hawk on U.S. Middle East policy.


Steve Forbes, head of the Forbes magazine empire, is an active supporter of a number of militarist policy organizations that have pushed for aggressive U.S. foreign policies.


Stephen Hadley, an Iraq War hawk and former national security adviser to President George W. Bush, now chairs the U.S. Institute for Peace.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The Trump administration appears to have been surprised by this breach among its friends in the critical Gulf strategic area. But it is difficult to envision an effective U.S. role in rebuilding this Humpty-Dumpty.


Print Friendly

A recent vote in the European Parliament shows how President Trump’s relentless hostility to Iran is likely to isolate Washington more than Tehran.


Print Friendly

The head of the Institute for Science and International Security—aka “the Good ISIS”—recently demonstrated again his penchant for using sloppy analysis as a basis for politically explosive charges about Iran, in this case using a faulty translation from Persian to misleadingly question whether Tehran is “mass producing advanced gas centrifuges.”


Print Friendly

Trump has exhibited a general preference for authoritarians over democrats, and that preference already has had impact on his foreign policy. Such an inclination has no more to do with realism than does a general preference for democrats over authoritarians.


Print Friendly

The President went to the region as a deal maker and a salesman for American weapon manufacturing. He talked about Islam, terrorism, Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without the benefit of expert advice in any of these areas. After great showmanship in Riyadh, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem, he and his family left the region without much to show for or to benefit the people of that war-torn region.


Print Friendly

Although the Comey memo scandal may well turn out to be what brings Trump down, this breach of trust may have had more lasting effect than any of Trump’s other numerous misadventures. It was an unprecedented betrayal of Israel’s confidence. Ironically, Trump has now done what even Barack Obama’s biggest detractors never accused him of: seriously compromised Israel’s security relationship with the United States.


Print Friendly

Congress and the public acquiesce in another military intervention or a sharp escalation of one of the U.S. wars already under way, perhaps it’s time to finally consider the true costs of war, American-style — in lives lost, dollars spent, and opportunities squandered. It’s a reasonable bet that never in history has a society spent more on war and gotten less bang for its copious bucks.


RightWeb
share