Kerry's Foreign Policy Trap

John Kerry is getting more than his share of tsuris these days: On Saturday, April 24 the New York Times ran a front page story headlined "Kerry's Anti-War Past Is a Delicate Issue in Campaign" and America Online featured it as its top news story of the day. In an accompanying AOL poll, 67 percent of the people responding to the question "Do you think John Kerry's anti-war past will hurt him in November?" answered yes. Despite polls showing the public does not believe America is safer today than it was before 9/11 and that most people believe there will be another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, Kerry has not been able to distinguish himself from President Bush on these and a host of other foreign policy issues.

Leave it to the San Francisco Chronicle's brilliant cartoonist/satirist, Don Asmussen, the creator of "Bad Reporter: The LIES behind the TRUTH, and the TRUTH behind those LIES that are behind that TRUTH," to sum up Kerry's dilemma: The strip's first panel on April 23 features the headline "U.S. Invaded, Taken Over By Al Qaeda -- Kerry Still Lags Behind Bush." While Kerry "brain trust" urges him to strike back, the candidate incredulously claims that the "voters are more interested in education."

In the penultimate panel, Bush has "accidentally" destroyed the Earth, yet, "Kerry Still Trails in Polls." Finally, Bush, in space standing on "on a piece of what used to be Maine," is calling for "More Tax Cuts." A "directionless" Kerry is floating around in space and grasps for the "one last chance to turn things around." He reaches out for...Sen. Joe Lieberman!

On the domestic side of the balance sheet, should Kerry be elected he won't be calling on the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Rev. Pat Robertson for advice; he won't have a horde of right-wing operatives embedded within the administration fashioning domestic policy; and his administration won't be a one-stop employment agency for policy wonks from the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Family Research Council and other right wing think tanks, public policy institutes and lobbying outfits. On such issues as a woman's right to choose, workers rights, judicial appointments, faith-based initiatives, education, health care and the rights of gays Kerry has thus far remained on the moderately liberal to progressive side of the ledger.

However, in light of the dramatic increase in U.S. casualties in Iraq -- 720 as of this writing -- the resumption of fighting in Fallujah -- a city that has already experienced more than 1000 dead, including hundreds of woman and children -- and the daily suicide bombings and insurgent attacks, it is becoming increasingly clear that the battlefield for the election will not be the economy, education, the environment or even same-sex marriage. It will be the president's war on terrorism, his failed occupation of Iraq, and his other "visionary" foreign policy initiatives. On these issues Kerry has chosen to march nearly lock-step with Bush.

There are nuanced differences between Kerry and Bush on Iraq -- while in support of the war, Kerry doesn't think Bush is handling the postwar period well. In fighting the war on terrorism Kerry suggests U.S. resources are being squandered -- but these are differences without a distinction. Kerry prefers the United Nations take a lead role in the "handover," but that pretty much squares itself with Bush's recent statements that the construction of a transition government is in the hands of the United Nations special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi. Bush's move "essentially co-opted Kerry's long-standing proposal that the United Nations be given a key role in administering the occupation and organizing elections," the San Francisco Chronicle's Robert Collier recently wrote.