Foreign Policy and the 1992 Election

Norman J. Ornstein

From Foreign Affairs, Summer 1992

Article preview: first 500 of 5,967 words total.

Summary:  Jeremiad against the "disgust, disaffection and disarray" now evident in US politics.

Norman J. Ornstein is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. Copyright © 1992 by Norman J. Ornstein.

Presidential elections rarely revolve around foreign policy. At the same time foreign policy issues are rarely absent as pivotal points in presidential campaign give?and?take. Narrow or broad, event?driven or character?motivated, questions of how Washington will deal with external threats or will shape America?s role in the world somehow surface in the build?up to presidential elections.

The grounds for an urgent examination of America?s role in the world are especially great. The end of the Cold War has thrown our existing assumptions and most of our traditional political divisions into turmoil. We have a new, key question: What does a superpower do in a world no longer dominated by superpower conflict? There is no obvious or easy answer, and a substantial and broad?based debate will be necessary before any kind of consensus can emerge.

Yet the climate for such a debate could not be worse. The question about what role America plays in the world comes at a time when America has no appetite for it and instead is turning inward, yearning to solve festering domestic problems. Equally significant, Americans are simultaneously feeling more unhappy with their own political system and policy?makers than at any time in modern memory. The campaign agenda, such as it is, has been dominated not by questions of budget deficits or national defense, but by "issues" of personal scandal and institutional wrongdoing, along with complaints about undeserved perks and privileges for pampered officials.

Cutting through the static to focus on the real themes seems an impossible task. Yet, erratically, in a largely subterranean way, it is beginning to happen; some rough sense is emerging as to what America is likely to do. What will happen, who will benefit politically and how this might affect America?s role in the post?Cold War world are the subjects of this essay.

II

Disgust, disaffection, disarray?these are terms that best characterize the state of American politics in 1992. They express the profound paradox of our time. In a most basic way this ought to be a celebratory moment. The singular goal sought by America for more than four decades?a goal that dominated public discourse, demanded huge sums of money and large numbers of lives, and made leaders and governments rise and fall?was achieved in an incredible fashion, with unbelievable ease. The spread of international communism and the threat of an "Evil Empire" that consumed our spirit and values ended, with barely a whimper and nary a bang.

The Soviet Union did not beat a tactical retreat to regroup or turn resentfully in defeat and proclaim that it would be back to fight another day; rather, its citizens rejoiced in the victory of the values of the West and the defeat of their own. It is nearly impossible to walk the corridors of the Capitol without bumping into a delegation from Russia or an east European country seeking to learn from the exemplar how the American political and economic systems work, so as to emulate their successes.

But if others view ...

End of preview: first 500 of 5,967 words total.