Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power

At Amazon, Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism.

Sarah Churchwell, Behold, America

At Amazon, Sarah Churchwell, Behold, America: The Entangled History of 'America First' and 'the American Dream'.

Syria Spotlights Impotence of the United Nations

This is great.

At Der Spiegel, "War and Peace: Disunity and Impotence at the United Nations":

The mandate of the United Nations is to preserve peace in the world, but when it comes to the Syrian crisis, the global body has failed badly. Will the UN's new secretary-general be able to finally introduce necessary reforms?

The UN was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell.
- Dag Hammarskjöld, UN secretary-general, during a May 1954 speech.

The man who, by simply raising his hand, prevented all efforts to end the war in Syria is sitting in a bunker-like room on 67th Street in Manhattan. Chandeliers are hanging above his head, a pendulum clock is keeping the time behind him and the furniture recalls Soviet-era filmography. "We have had this problem with Syria, of course, and ...… I (have) thought a lot about it," says Vitaly Ivanovich Churkin, Russia's ambassador to the United Nations. An ironic expression on his face, the white-haired diplomat leans back in his leather chair.

Churkin is one of the men charged with saving the world. As absurd as it might sound, that is his job. The 15 members of the UN Security Council, in particular the five permanent members -- China, France, Great Britain, Russia and the United States -- bear "primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security," according to Article 24 of the Charter of the United Nations.

It is a heroic task, an idealistic notion that was born out of the ruins of World War II: The peoples of the Earth joining together to protect the only planet we have. Uniting their strength, the world's countries hoped to create a better world, a place where all people can live in dignity. And the prerequisite for doing so is peace.

In 2001, the United Nations and its then-secretary-general, Kofi Annan, received the Nobel Peace Prize "for their work for a better organized and more peaceful world." It is also thanks to the UN that nuclear war has thus far been prevented, that war criminals from former Yugoslavia were forced to stand trial and that we now have a Paris Climate Agreement, which is aimed at preventing the destruction of the world.

But what has been happening in Syria for the last five years is the opposite of peace: a proxy world war being fought on Syrian territory. It has called everything into question for which the UN stands. The images and the calls for help that innocent men, women and children have been sending out to the world via Facebook and Twitter are unbearable. And yet the world stands by, watching as though it were all merely part of a particularly long horror movie...

More.

Libertarians Give Rand Paul a Pass

At Politico:

Rand Paul insists he’s not an isolationist. Luckily for him, many in his libertarian base are willing to let him keep saying that.

A movement that often demands ideological purity is, for now, largely giving the potential 2016 presidential contender a pass, even as he appears to take some foreign policy positions well beyond traditional libertarian limits.

Libertarians say they’re willing to look the other way because the Kentucky Republican — the son of isolationist iconoclast Ron Paul — is their best hope for taking their views into the mainstream and all the way to the White House. In more than a dozen interviews at a libertarian conference this week in Alexandria, Virginia, many attendees said they understand if Paul, who recently came out in favor of airstrikes against militants in Iraq, has to hedge on some issues to gain broader appeal — but that they still believe he’s one of them at heart.

“He’s playing two games,” said John Walsh, a former professor of physiology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. “He’s trying to position himself so he doesn’t get tripped up and ruled out [of 2016], and at the same time, maintain his anti-interventionism.”

Paul already faces deep skepticism from many establishment Republicans. They are quick to note that he once espoused isolationist-leaning views, including arguing for ending all foreign aid, including to Israel; reining in defense spending and expressing deep reluctance to intervene in the Middle East. He has since distanced himself from some of those positions — saying, for instance, that he would not support ending aid to Israel anytime soon — but hawkish members of the GOP donor class remain unconvinced.

“When people meet Sen. Paul in person, they’re impressed by him, and he exceeds the expectations they have based upon the rantings of his father,” said one Republican who works closely with hawkish GOP donors. “He can change his positions now and come across as friendly in one-on-one meetings, but he still, at some point, is going to have to explain for his previous positions. And by the way, if he actually flips to a pro-Israel or more interventionist foreign policy, he’s going to lose a lot of his base libertarian isolationist supporters.”

More.

I just can't keep up with Rand Paul's foreign policy. He's like Obama. Tryna track closely with public opinion, which is lame.

Rick Perry: Obama Doesn't Care About Border Security (VIDEO)

Governor Perry's seeing his star rise amid the border invasion, and I'm glad he's taking a stand against Rand Paul and the isolationists on foreign policy.



And from yesterday's Washington Post, from Governor Perry, "Isolationist policies make the threat of terrorism even greater":

As a veteran, and as a governor who has supported Texas National Guard deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, I can understand the emotions behind isolationism. Many people are tired of war, and the urge to pull back is a natural, human reaction. Unfortunately, we live in a world where isolationist policies would only endanger our national security even further.

That’s why it’s disheartening to hear fellow Republicans, such as Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), suggest that our nation should ignore what’s happening in Iraq. The main problem with this argument is that it means ignoring the profound threat that the group now calling itself the Islamic State poses to the United States and the world.

RTWT.

Sen. Rand Paul Goes All Isolationist on #Iraq

I'd been warming up to Rand Paul these last few years, especially after his foreign policy speech at the Heritage Foundation.

But I'm not so sure now. It doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about.

Here's the short clip of his Candy Crowley interview below, and the longer version here, "Rand Paul: We armed ISIS' allies in Syria to fight them in Iraq."



He sounds like a leftist.

More from Pat Dollard:

So many Republicans have been conned by lying, libertarian filth like @SenRandPaul into thinking that libertarianism is something it isn't
— Patrick Dollard (@PatDollard) June 22, 2014

WATCH, MORON OF THE CENTURY-@SenRandPaul: Stopping A Terror Attack On The U.S. Is Not 'A Clear-Cut American Interest' http://t.co/ObksspObZZ
— Patrick Dollard (@PatDollard) June 22, 2014

WATCH - @SenRandPaul: Blame Bush For Return Of Al Qaeda Power In Iraq Since Last Year, Not Obama http://t.co/4jjjRDfsjn #teaparty #lnyhbt
— Patrick Dollard (@PatDollard) June 22, 2014

Also at NBC, "Sen. Rand Paul's Full Interview on Meet the Press."

BONUS: From Darleen at Protein Wisdom, "Re: Iraq and The Left’s politics of Shut-uppery."

Is the Neo-Isolationist Moment Already Over?

From the always awesome Walter Russell Mead:

As the domestic political debate over these crises heats up, we are seeing a classic American pattern in action. America’s success abroad breeds stupidity and hubris in U.S. foreign policy. This hubris and stupidity leads to bad choices and magical thinking. We begin to believe, for example, that the world can become safer and more democratic even as we scale back our involvement. These bad choices and bad ideas then lead to huge global challenges. Those challenges ultimately spark smarter, more purposeful American engagement, usually after we’ve tried a few unsuccessful gambits first. That engagement finally leads to American success, which leads back again to American stupidity and hubris. And so on.

RTWT.

America's Dereliction of Duty

That sound you're hearing is America's international standing dissipating.

At the Economist, "America and the IMF":

ANYONE who doubts the importance of the International Monetary Fund should look at Ukraine. Every Western nation is talking about helping the Ukrainians resist Vladimir Putin. In terms of immediate cash, America has come up with $1 billion of loan guarantees, while the European Union has found €1.6 billion ($2.2 billion) of budget support. The IMF, meanwhile, is discussing lending Ukraine’s government about $15 billion. It is the only outfit capable of mobilising large sums fast. That is why, for the past 70 years, the fund has been the world’s financial firefighter. And it is why Congress’s refusal to support reforms to strengthen it is shockingly shortsighted.

The reforms in question concern the IMF’s system of “quotas”. Each country’s quota determines how much it pays in, its clout in the organisation and how much it can borrow if it gets into trouble. America’s quota is the biggest, giving it veto power. But today’s system gives excessive heft to small countries in Europe and too little to emerging economies. And, at $370 billion, the total value of the quotas is modest compared with the scale of global capital flows. That is why, during the 2008-09 financial crisis, the fund’s resources were topped up with temporary credit lines from big economies. And it is why, in December 2010, at America’s instigation, the fund’s members agreed to a bolder reform that would double the quotas and raise the emerging economies’ voting power.

More than three years later, Congress has still not endorsed this reform. It failed to do so once again this week, and in a particularly galling manner. The Obama administration tried to attach quota reform to the legislation approving America’s bilateral aid to Ukraine. Both the House of Representatives and the Senate refused to include it. Just as the fund is promising billions for a country that America is desperate to support, Congress has undercut it.

This is a shameful outcome, driven largely by ignorance. The fund’s most vociferous congressional critics, mainly Republicans, misunderstand both the organisation and its reforms. They argue that the quota change would put more taxpayer money at risk and weaken America’s influence within the fund. Both claims are bogus. America will retain its veto power. The larger role for emerging economies comes at the expense of European countries. Nor does a larger quota add to America’s overall exposure, not least because its credit lines to the fund will be commensurately cut.

The real risk to Americans lies in Congress’s failure to support the reforms that its technocrats championed. This has infuriated the fund’s other member countries, making them less inclined to support America’s priorities. Big assistance packages, such as that for Ukraine, could be a casualty of their anger at America’s unwillingness to live up to its promises. And with a smaller quota and greater reliance on credit, the fund’s finances will be less secure that they should be. America’s arsenal of economic diplomacy will be the emptier for it.

Unravelling Bretton Woods, one vote at a time

Depressingly, few politicians in Washington seem to care. The sense of hegemonic responsibility that led America to create organisations like the IMF and World Bank in 1944, and to nurture them in subsequent decades, is eroding fast. Republicans, particularly the isolationist tea-party sort, deserve much of the blame. But so, too, does the White House...

I can't stand isolationism, from whatever the source. And the Bretton Woods institutions are among the most important financial and monetary organizations in world politics. America needs to lead them or the liberal international order will lie vulnerable to erosion and eventual collapse.