by CKR
The way an essay is constructed tells you as much as the content of the essay. In my previous post on Barack Obama’s and Mitt Romney’s essays in Foreign Affairs, I tried to keep just to the policy statements they made. But there is much more to the essays, which is why I continue to recommend that you read the essays themselves (Obama, Romney).
I won’t go into a complete structural analysis of the essays in this post, but there is one technique that both share that, as I’ve been thinking about the essays over the last few days, I think I should mention. That is what I might call the anti-recommendation. The writer details a current or past policy or practice and says that it is the wrong way for the country to go. This gives the reader the sense that the writer might do something different, but no specific recommendation follows.
When I first ran into this tactic in Obama’s essay, I wondered if I should list the negative. But then there were positive recommendations, so I decided I’d stick with those only and not attribute my inferences to the candidates.
I think it’s worth mentioning because it is a way for the candidates to position themselves without actually promising anything. It’s both a fair enough way for themselves to allow for wiggle room at this early date, when circumstances can change, and somewhat misleading in that the candidate has identified something that he implies needs to be changed but doesn’t say how.
An example from Obama:
For more than three decades, Israelis, Palestinians, Arab leaders, and the rest of the world have looked to America to lead the effort to build the road to a lasting peace. In recent years, they have all too often looked in vain. Our starting point must always be a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That commitment is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region -- a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. Now more than ever, we must strive to secure a lasting settlement of the conflict with two states living side by side in peace and security. To do so, we must help the Israelis identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability.This is a somewhat borderline example; it does include a recommendation at the end, but it’s a particularly weak example that seems in fact to confirm the current policies.
An example from Romney:
While the difficult struggle in Iraq dominates the political debate, we cannot let current polls and political dynamics drive us to repeat mistakes the United States has made at critical moments of doubt and uncertainty about our role in the world. Twice in the last several decades, following the end of U.S. military involvement in Vietnam and the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, the United States became dangerously unprepared. Today, among our main challenges are an Iranian regime and an al Qaeda network that developed while we let down our defenses. Whether or not the current "surge" in troop levels in Iraq succeeds, the United States and our allies need to be prepared to deal not only with the struggle against jihadists but with a new generation of challenges that go far beyond any single nation or conflict.Again, not without a recommendation, but a weak one. To be fair, both add some recommendations that might apply to these statements of concern about current and past policies in later parts of their essays, but both of these paragraphs are more atmospherics than substance.
Meanwhile, thanks to Mark for his kind words. He has a question I’ve been wondering about too:
I'm curious to know the "how" of these articles - ghostwritten? Personally revised drafts written by junior staff? Written in conjunction with a key adviser or two ? Fundamentally their own views ?
Finally, there will be constant developments in the candidates' positions, like Obama's apparent vow to invade Pakistan. We'll see if he cares to clarify the rights of sovereign countries in his foreign policy, and there will be more to come. It's worth noting that he repeats some of the points in the Foreign Affairs article in this speech. I'm not going to try to cover every development, but will stick with the bigger policy pronouncements.