Soccer Dad

The permanent campaign

Today Jim Hoagland praises President Obama's "Foreign Policy by Deadline."

What emerges is a clear picture of the making of foreign policy, Obama-style.

If conflicts can be halted by setting deadlines and crisply reaching decision points, this president may have a lock on the Nobel Peace Prize for years to come.

Critics will say that I am actually describing a process for putting off tough decisions. Here's why I disagree: In nearly six months in office, Obama has established a set of strategically conceived deadlines to deal with the most urgent challenges he faces, turning international summits and other leadership meetings into policy trampolines that propel him and his ideas forward to the next test.

Not surprisingly, this approach draws heavily on his greatest success, the amazing 2008 election campaign. If there is a danger, it is not that Obama is a procrastinator. It is that he is bunching too many decisive moments together and not leaving himself room to work with unexpected events.

Except running foreign policy (or even domestic policy) is different from running a political campaign. The goal of a political campaign is to get as many people to vote for you as possible. There are quite a few more variable to deal with in foreign policy, as well as quite a few more conditions that can be used to determine (or define) success and failure.

Rick Richman sees a similar trend in the President's approach to foreign policy. He doesn't see it as shrewd, but rather calls it Foreign Policy as Speaking engagment. And Don Surber (via memeorandum) observes:

Issues aside, Obama is learning that running for president is a lot easier than being president.

Back on January 26, Robert Schlesinger criticized the President for running a "permanent campaign." Hoagland's column - which attempts to turn it into a virtue - and the other observations confirm six months later that this is exactly how the President governs.