At the Peak, a Unique View

Texas Gov. George W. Bush began his run for the Republican presidential nomination demonstrably knowing little about major foreign policy issues or even the proper names of some of America’s NATO allies. But he did know enough to enlist the help of some people who know quite a lot, and for some weeks now he has been undergoing extensive tutelage in the intricacies of international relations and national security. At the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi the other day Bush delivered his first major foreign policy speech. It contained no surprises and no gaffes.

Bush positioned himself solidly with the internationalist and free-trade wing of his party while expressing the GOP’s traditional commitment to being strong on defense and firm with China and Russia when their actions threaten the interests of the United States and its allies. A retreat to isolationism would be a “shortcut to disaster.” China must be dealt with “without ill will--but without illusions.” When Russia attacks civilians, as in Chechnya, “it can no longer expect aid from international lending institutions.” Most Americans, to the extent that they pay attention to world issues at all, would have little trouble accepting these views.

One speech and the briefings that preceded it do not of course add up to an expertise in foreign policy. A key test of how much of the material Bush has mastered could come in a few weeks, when he is supposed to take part in a forum with fellow Republican presidential aspirants, several of whom, like Sen. John McCain and publisher Steve Forbes, are well versed in international relations.

Bush surely knows that some earlier candidates, among them President Gerald Ford in a debate with Jimmy Carter that preceded the 1976 election, stumbled badly over some foreign policy questions. Carter himself subsequently lost credibility when as president he confessed how surprised and shocked he was at the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. Sometimes, as events reveal, a candidate’s campaign rhetoric has little to do with reality. Bill Clinton excoriated President George Bush for his China policy. Then, as president, he embraced it.

What a candidate says in a campaign doesn’t necessarily foreshadow what he wants or is able to do as president. There is an often subtle connectedness in the conduct of international relations that can be best perceived only from the summit of power. The view from the White House, in short, is not identical with the view from the campaign trail. That’s a good thing for voters to remember as they begin to pay attention to the 2000 campaign.