One of John Kerry’s main claims is that he’ll do a better job of coalition-building than Bush. I think this may actually be true, though perhaps for different reasons. But it’s pretty damned hard to find evidence for it in his campaign.
First, we have the repeated dismissals of the US’s coalition in Iraq as (paraphrasing) a collection of small unimportant countries. This would be a stupid thing to do even if it were completely accurate – Presidents are supposed to stand there with a straight face and say they value the aid and support of East Buttfickistan. But ISTM that essentially announce before you take office that you consider Japan, Korea and most of the EU to be worthless is pretty damned undiplomatic.
Second, we have the Kerry campaign’s suggestion to Australia that they shouldn’t have helped us in Iraq. Assuming that damaging John Howard wasn’t the goal here, how exactly does this message do anything but undermine support from one of our top allies?
And finally, we have today’s response to Allawi. I’ll be the first to agree that Bush probably timed this visit for his political advantage, not the nation’s. He’s a politician too. But the responsible and diplomatic thing for Kerry to do is show up in Congress (it is still his job), applaud when Allawi is introduced, and show respect for the visiting head of state. If he was really smart, he’d have publicly requested to meet with Allawi --“After all, I’ll have to work with the Prime Minister after I win the election” – and Bush would be hard pressed to deny it. Kerry gets a photo-op where he looks presidential, and after the meeting Allawi (being a politician himself) says something vague about how Kerry is wise or impressive or some such. Kerry ducks the question about not supporting the war, and just says that PM Allawi is the right man as we move forward, yadda yadda yadda.
But no. Instead Kerry instead chooses to imply that Allawi is A) a tool of Bush and B) a liar. Once again, whether it’s true or not is irrelevant; for better or worse, we’re up into our ass in Iraq and will be for some time, and this is the guy nominally in charge there. He may well win an election there, and President Kerry would have to work with him for several years if he did. Of course being labeled a tool of Bush won’t help Allawi with that; what it will do is lend support to candidates who are anti-American. Smooth move, senator.
This is not about Bush. I didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, I probably won’t vote for him this year, and frankly I think he hasn’t treated our allies as well as he should either. And yes, all of this can be papered over; that’s what we hire diplomats for. But how are we supposed to believe Kerry is some farsighted wizard of diplomacy when he seems to go out of his way to shit on foreign leaders whose support he’s going to need if he actually wins?