Experience vs. Identity in Foreign Policy

[I originally posted this to my "Iran Outside In" blog, but I'm closing that down, and moving over a few articles that seem appropriate.]

I am a big fan of Fareed Zakaria. He is one of the few columnists out there who not only recognizes America's responsibility to appear moral to the world (and I mean that as an addition to "being" moral, not as an alternative), but also has the ability to understand and articulate how others view us, regardless of whether those people are friends or foes.

In this particular column, Fareed uncomfortably recognizes that the reason he prefers Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton on foreign policy is precisely because he believes Barack has a better "feel" for how non-Americans perceive our country. In other words, it's not about foreign policy "experience", it's about being able to empathize (in the sense of "deep understanding").

Zakaria: The Power of Personality Newsweek.com

I never thought I'd be in this position. There's a debate taking place about what matters most when making judgments about foreign policy—experience and expertise on the one hand, or personal identity on the other. And I find myself coming down on the side of identity.

But when I think about what is truly distinctive about the way I look at the world, about the advantage that I may have over others in understanding foreign affairs, it is that I know what it means not to be an American. I know intimately the attraction, the repulsion, the hopes, the disappointments that the other 95 percent of humanity feels when thinking about this country. I know it because for a good part of my life, I wasn't an American. I was the outsider, growing up 8,000 miles away from the centers of power, being shaped by forces over which my country had no control.

I call the recognition "uncomfortable" because of course, Fareed has made a career out of foreign policy (degrees, books, experience…). Yet, here he has to admit that while those gave him the necessary tools, what makes him really good as an advisor to America is his non-American upbringing.

Which leads me to something that always seems to be forgotten when we get around to picking our leaders. In the end, the true strength of a leader is not what they know, but how well they choose their advisors. It's a rare person who has the courage to surround themselves with people who are smarter than they are, and an even rarer one who can do so without being manipulated. Where would Kennedy have been without his brother as Attorney General? And since then, only Carter and (perhaps) George Bush Sr. have had those skills.

A leader may provide the ideology, but the advisors provide the tools and information. A smart leader knows that, and isn't afraid to pick advisors who differ in ideology but have greater skills.

But whomever becomes President next year, they could do far worse than choosing Fareed Zakaria as an advisor.

Leave a comment

(not displayed)

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.marrowbones.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/91

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Experience vs. Identity in Foreign Policy.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Kee Hinckley published on February 25, 2008 3:58 PM.

Black and White Dolls - this is not the future you are looking for was the previous entry in this blog.

The Siegelman Conviction as a Lesson About a Surveillance Society is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Subscribe via Reader

Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

About Me

I'm the CEO/CTO of Somewhere, Inc., a company building a unified social networking layer that gives people the means to track their friends across multiple social networks.
Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.