10 YEAR ANNIVERSARY
Independent. Anti-War. Unbought.

Hillary Clinton and the Neocons

by | Nov 4, 2016

Hillary Clinton and the Neocons

by | Nov 4, 2016

Veteran GOP foreign policy hawks are flocking to Hillary Clinton. Is it callow opportunism, or a major realignment?

Much has been made of the swing in political allegiances of neoconservatives in favor of Hillary Clinton.

As a group, Washington’s neocons are generally terrified of Trump’s unpredictability and his flirtation with the alt-right. They also support Clinton’s more assertive foreign policy (not to mention her closer relationship to Israel). Perhaps, too, after eight long years in the wilderness, they’re daydreaming of an appointment or two in a Clinton administration.

This group of previously staunch Republicans, who believe in using American military power to promote democracy, build nations, and secure U.S. interests abroad, have defected in surprising numbers. Washington Post columnist Robert Kagan, the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens, and the Foreign Policy Initiative’s James Kirchick have all endorsed Clinton. Other prominent neocons like The National Review’s William Kristol, the Wall Street Journal’s Max Boot, and SAIS’s Eliot Cohen have rejected Trump but not quite taken the leap to supporting Clinton.

A not particularly large or well-defined group, neoconservatives have attracted a disproportionate amount of attention in this election. For the Trump camp, these Republican defectors merely prove that the elite is out to get their candidate, thus reinforcing his outsider credentials (never mind that Trump initially wooed neocons like Kristol). For the left, the neocons are flocking to support a bird of their feather, at least when it comes to foreign policy, which reflects badly on Clinton. The mainstream media, meanwhile, are attracted to the man-bites-dog aspect of the story (news flash: members of the vast right-wing conspiracy support Clinton!).

As we come to the end of the election campaign, which has been more a clash of personalities than of ideologies, the neocon defections offer a much more interesting story line. As the Republican Party potentially coalesces around a more populist center, the neocons are the canary in the coalmine. Their squawking suggests that the American political scene is about to suffer a cataclysm. What will that mean for U.S. foreign policy?

Read the rest by John Feffer at Foreign Policy in Focus.

Recent Articles

Recent

War Is A Policy, Not An Inevitability

War Is A Policy, Not An Inevitability

One of the most persistent myths about war is that it is sometimes inevitable. States are carried along by the impersonal forces of history: the balance of power, alliance commitments, ideological antagonisms, the rise and decline of great powers, et cetera. Leaders...

read more
How America Got Its Hands on Egypt

How America Got Its Hands on Egypt

After Hosni Mubarak became president of Egypt in 1981, his government maintained a close relationship with the United States. Over the following decades, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) would become increasingly involved in reforming Egypt's...

read more
A Western Civ Speech Only A Neocon Could Love

A Western Civ Speech Only A Neocon Could Love

When one of my acquaintances expressed his enthusiasm for Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s October 7 speech from the Acropolis in Athens, Greece—seeing it as the de facto launching of a presidential campaign—I thought to watch the talk in its entirety. It was worth...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This