Hawks reclaim lost ground in America

In the space of weeks, Washington has been transformed from the capital of a reluctant imperium into a cheerleader for the recommitment of the US military to another potentially intractable conflict in Iraq.

The astounding turnround, in Washington and in US public sentiment, has appeared to catch Barack Obama short, and returned ascendancy on foreign policy to the capital's hawks after years on the defensive following the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

"I think the combination of Ukraine and Isis have created a springtime for neoconservatives - they are feeling their oats," said Jacob Heilbrunn, of the National Interest, in Washington.

The new politics of US foreign policy are already flowing into the early stages of the 2016 presidential contest, where the debate is shifting to how Washington can go on the offensive rather than withdraw from overseas conflicts.

"Mr Obama's call for the US to lead an international military campaign in the Middle East has the potential to begin a departure from the isolationism that he and Hillary Rodham Clinton have advocated during their years in office," said Marco Rubio, the Florida senator who may seek the Republican 2016 nomination.

The Cook Political Report on Friday noted the return of the "security Mom", voters once focused exclusively on domestic issues but who shifted after the 9/11 attacks to worry about the "safety" of their children in an unstable world.

The turning point was the beheadings last month of two US journalists by members of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or Isis. Once videos of their killings were posted on the internet by Isis, their deaths amounted to virtual public executions.

Bill McInturff, a Republican-aligned pollster who along with a Democratic colleague conducts the closely watched Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, said the change in public opinion had been "sudden". That poll showed 61 per cent of respondents thought military action against Isis was in America's national interest.

Although he admits it may be "harsh" to say, "when foreign policy matters, it is when American lives have been lost".

The beheadings had the biggest impact of any news story followed by Americans in the past five years of his polling. "This was a big deal," he said.

Just over a year ago, when Mr Obama called for congressional support for bombing Syria, Capitol Hill rebuffed him.

Next week, however, Congress is set without fanfare to vote to support extra funds for the so-called moderate Syrian rebels.

Other factors have built the foundations for a return to a more interventionist policy, most notably the gradual recovery in the US economy which has reduced pressure for deep cuts to Pentagon spending.

The US budget deficit has dropped from 10 per cent of economic output in 2009 to three per cent in 2014, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

US foreign policy also has cycles, with expensive, morale-draining wars sapping public support for interventionist policies until events shift the pendulum back the other way.

But the biggest factor has been the multiple upheavals overseas, over the past year in particular, and Mr Obama's seeming inability to do anything about them.

"There has been an awakening to the level of chaos in the world - Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Gaza and so on - all of which were not only unsettling but visible," said David Rothkopf, of Foreign Policy.

<

The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.

The foreign policy establishment in Washington has always had a bias towards interventionism and many former officials and influential analysts have been increasingly critical of Mr Obama's reluctance to shift the strategy of retrenchment he was elected upon.

Mr Obama's rhetoric has always been that of a superpower but his words were combined with a policy of steadfast caution, with the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan in mind.

Despite the commitment of more US military assets to fight Isis, Mr Obama's fresh policy announced this week is still centred on getting the Iraqi and Arab regional governments into a position where they can eventually lead the fight themselves.

Outspoken hawks, like John McCain, the Republican senator from Arizona, is not convinced that Mr Obama has changed, or whether he is simply adjusting policy to make it more in line with public opinion. "When are the air strikes going to begin? I could give them some targets now," he said.

Mr McInturff, the pollster, says public sentiment is still not back to where it was in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

"Mr Obama's speech was in tenor, tone and the action it laid out very consistent with public attitudes," he said.

Still, the ground has shifted under the White House. "The dominant foreign policy establishment," says Mr Heilbrunn, "has pushed Mr Obama into a corner."

© The Financial Times Limited 2014. All rights reserved.
FT and Financial Times are trademarks of the Financial Times Ltd.
Not to be redistributed, copied or modified in any way.
Euro2day.gr is solely responsible for providing this translation and the Financial Times Limited does not accept any liability for the accuracy or quality of the translation