Robert P. Casey Jr.
Casey viewpoints have sensible tone
January 12, 2008
Source: Republican & Herald
By Editorial
U.S. Sen. Robert P. Casey is a credit to the state he represents and the region of that state from which he hails.
In the midst of the angry polarization that is the debate on our nation’s muddled foreign policies, the son of the deceased former governor steers for the sensible middle.
It’s a funny thing. When you think of Casey, the first things that usually come to mind are things like health care, unfair taxation and other “social” issues. However, during a meeting Thursday with members of The REPUBLICAN & Herald editorial board, the senator manifested an unfeigned perspicacity in regard to foreign affairs.
Casey clearly criticized the Bush administration’s handling of foreign affairs. He did so without hurling insults and calling people names or making fun of the way the president talks or attacking anyone personally. That was refreshing. That is proper. Just policy.
The senator believes the key — or at least one of the big keys — in bringing about an end to the Iraq War is establishing a sufficient Iraqi defense force that can fight the rebels who plague that ancient land without the help of American soldiers. He believes the administration has not made doing so a priority.
The way Casey, who visited the region in his capacity as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, describes it, the administration knows this is a priority but seems too easily distracted by other priorities. He backs this up with information gathered from conversations with generals and other officials.
Casey also believes — and this is the significant divide with the administration and most of its supporters — that the lack of a deadline for withdrawing from Iraq prevents the Iraqis from taking their own responsibilities seriously.
It’s a serious question. When the administration tells us it fears setting a deadline would only encourage the insurgents, it is probably because that is what Bush and his cabinet actually believe and there is no doubt some truth in it.
However, as Casey pointed out, this is not a conventional war. There won’t be a surrender ceremony some day when the terror leaders put on their best suits and climb aboard a warship to sign papers, hand over their weapons and then either retire or go to prison. We will fight terrorists for the rest of the century or longer. If we don’t want to be always fighting them in Iraq, we need a viable Iraqi government that can stand on its own. If we keep fighting their battles for them and promise to do so forever until they are ready, they won’t get ready.
While he is in line with his party’s position on the deadline issue, Casey differs with many of his fellow Democrats on another key issue. He has opposed the Democrats’ efforts to cut off all funding to our fighting forces in order to browbeat the president into changing his plans. He has not favored giving Bush all the money he asked for, but wants the armed forces to have what they need.
He also appears to have no regard for the terrorists, saying several times during the interview that they should simply be hunted down and killed.
Casey criticized his own party and its supporters for playing down the threat of Iran. He believes Iran, trying to develop nuclear weapons, is quite dangerous and needs to be isolated economically and politically.
On a broader level, Casey says the president has used damaging rhetoric.
Using words like “World War III” and talking tough and pretending that alliances can be forged or patched up with one phone call have only alienated the rest of the planet. He warned that an estranged Russia and China could undermine our nation’s plans on a global scale (both nations can veto in the United Nations Security Council anything we might want to do about Iran, or anywhere else, and China holds a large part of our national debt). He said Bush has gotten us into a foreign relations hole, probably the worst in the nation’s history.
Casey is right about all this. We can only hope there are enough clear-thinking statesmen like him in Washington to fix these problems in the coming years.
As poorly as this administration has handled foreign affairs, the rabid anti-Bushites who seem to think just getting rid of him will fix everything would make as big a hash of foreign affairs without some sane guidance.
