Foreign Policy Tops Agenda for Democrats

The Democratic Party platform for 2004 will emphasize national security more than any party blueprint since the height of the Cold War in the early 1960s, according to a copy released Saturday.

Across the full range of domestic and foreign issues, the platform approved by the convention’s drafting committee closely follows the agenda of presumptive nominee Sen. John F. Kerry and underscores the Democrats’ determination to present a united front against President Bush.

On Iraq, the platform is as striking for what it does not say as for what it does say: It does not call the war a mistake and does not urge withdrawal of American troops from the troubled country. Instead the platform declares that the U.S. “cannot allow a failed state in Iraq that inevitably would become a haven for terrorists and a destabilizing force in the Middle East.”

The document also marks the first time a Democratic platform has explicitly endorsed an independent Palestinian state -- though it also embraces the controversial security guarantees Bush recently provided Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

The platform is about 35% shorter and somewhat more general and thematic than the platform from 2000. It must receive final approval from the full platform committee next weekend in Miami, and then at the Democratic National Convention in late July. But Kerry aides said they expected little of the contention that often marked such party deliberations from the 1960s into the 1980s.

Steve Elmendorf, a deputy campaign manager for Kerry who helped oversee the drafting process, said that although efforts to change the platform would be likely in Miami, he was confident the document would remain largely unchanged.

“I don’t think there has been a platform process in recent history where there hasn’t been discussion and amendments and votes,” Elmendorf said. “But [the document] reflects a broad agreement within the party.”

Staffers and volunteers from Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich’s long-shot presidential bid said they would to try to have his ideas, including the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, universal healthcare and a Cabinet-level Department of Peace, incorporated into the official platform.

But given Kucinich’s meager performance during the primaries, he will likely face an uphill climb in winning any changes.

The document approved so far perhaps most clearly reflected the priority that Kerry was placing on establishing his credentials as a potential commander in chief. The document begins with an extended discussion of foreign affairs that consumes almost half its length. The last times a Democratic platform began by discussing foreign policy rather than domestic issues were in 1964 and 1960, before the party was divided by Vietnam.

“We want to talk about how serious the party is, and how serious John Kerry is about protecting America,” said Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.), drafting committee chairwoman.

The document echoes Kerry’s charge that Bush has displayed “a new -- and dangerously ineffective -- disregard for the world” and failed to spend enough on bolstering domestic security. It reaffirms the candidate’s promises to “launch and lead a new era of alliances”; to modernize the military, in part, by funding 40,000 more troops; and to “end our dependence on Mideast oil” by accelerating the development of renewable energy sources.

Many of the Democratic platform’s most striking passages are notable for their stark description of the threats facing the United States in the world after the Sept. 11 attacks -- and their promise that Kerry would take stern steps to meet them.

It explicitly accepts Bush’s contention that the U.S. is now in a global war: “Today, America is waging a war against a global terrorist movement committed to our destruction,” the document states flatly.

And it says that although Kerry will pursue greater international cooperation, “we will never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake.” Nor does it rule out preemptive attack, though it suggests Kerry would reserve that option for threats more imminent than most Democrats believe Iraq posed.

If an attack against America with weapons of mass destruction “appears imminent, we will do everything necessary to stop it,” the platform declares. “If such a strike does occur, we will respond with overwhelming and devastating force.”

Reflecting lingering divisions in the Democratic Party, the platform avoids an opinion on Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, saying only that “people of good will disagree about whether America should have gone to war in Iraq.”

Instead, the document emphasizes the criticisms of Bush’s strategy that almost all Democrats, whether they supported the invasion or not, accept: It charges that the president exaggerated the evidence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, and alleges that he failed to exhaust diplomatic alternatives before the invasion, to build a sufficient international coalition or to commit enough troops to stabilize Iraq after the downfall of Saddam Hussein.

Scott Stanzel, a spokesman for the Bush reelection campaign, said the platform’s refusal to endorse or condemn the invasion “begs the question of what John Kerry really thinks” and provides evidence for the GOP charge that the Democrat has waffled on key national security issues. “Voters want a strong and steady leader when it comes to fighting the war on terror, and John Kerry has already demonstrated he would be anything but steady,” Stanzel said.

The document offers less guidance on what the U.S. should do now in Iraq. Like Kerry on the campaign trail, it calls for “massive” efforts to train Iraqi security forces to bear more of the burden and renewed efforts to win more military help from NATO. But it says nothing about how the Democrats might accomplish such goals, especially after NATO’s pointed refusal to send troops to Iraq.

The blueprint breaks more new ground on the dispute between Israel and the Palestinians -- though the overall effect is to bind the Democrats close to the policies Bush has pursued. While endorsing the creation of a Palestinian state, it also embraces the controversial two assurances Bush recently offered the Israeli prime minister: It says that in any final peace settlement, Palestinians should have a “right of return” to the new state, not to Israel itself, and acknowledges that Israel will retain some territory it has occupied since the 1967 war.

Jess Hordes, director of government and national affairs for the Anti-Defamation League, said that, within this broad agenda, the formal endorsement of a Palestinian state -- a position already embraced by Presidents Clinton and Bush -- was unlikely to generate much unease among American Jews.

On domestic issues as well, the platform closely follows Kerry’s lead. It emphasizes fiscal responsibility by rolling back Bush’s tax cuts for families earning $200,000 a year or more. It also proposes expanding access to healthcare.

Compared with the 2000 platform, it expresses more skepticism about free trade and less enthusiasm about using standardized tests in schools to toughen accountability for students, teachers and principals.

The platform also addresses social issues, supporting “equal responsibilities, benefits and protections” for gay families, opposing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and declaring that decisions on the definition of marriage should be left to the states. The document also expresses support for legalized abortion, but quotes Clinton’s dictum that it should be “safe, legal and rare.” And it endorses a process by which illegal immigrants who clear background checks, work and pay taxes can earn legal status.

*

Times staff writer Susannah Rosenblatt contributed to this report.