Kamala Harris has rallied
a coalition as broad as it is unusual: pop stars, elder statesmen and even some high-profile Republican
national security officials. They’re united by fear of Donald Trump’s assault on democracy and “America First” foreign policy.
But Harris should be wary. Embracing establishment foreign policy ideas is a Faustian bargain.
The Harris ticket makes clear the distinctions
between the two candidates’ worldviews. Harris offers a forward-looking vision for the country; Trump peddles a declinist
narrative. Harris supports America’s role in upholding international norms; Trump flouts the rules-based order. Harris affirms America’s commitment to allies
; Trump threatens to abandon them
. Harris dismisses Ukraine negotiations as appeasement; Trump promises to end the Ukraine War immediately.
This stark contrast has won over
former Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IIl). But retreating to the hawkish foreign policy orthodoxies these former lawmakers espouse isn’t the answer. It could even become a liability come November.
Here’s the problem: Americans have lost faith
in the foreign policy establishment. Iraq and Afghanistan wasted blood and treasure. Globalization inflamed economic insecurity. Ukraine and Middle East conflicts shake confidence in the Pax Americana.
Nearly half of Americans think political elites are among the biggest threats
to the nation, and according to a new poll
by my colleagues and me at the Institute for Global Affairs, most independent voters think Washington’s foreign policymakers rarely or never make decisions with the best interest of ordinary Americans in mind.
Foreign policy shapes Trump’s populist appeal more than many realize. He draws a direct line from overseas engagement to kitchen table issues. China steals jobs and traffics fentanyl
; foreign aid leaves the border underfunded; and alliances burden
taxpayers.
Enabling these disorders, Trump argues, is an out-of-touch political class that allows both adversaries and allies to take advantage of the U.S. His invective against the “deep state” taps into paranoid currents in U.S. foreign relations.
Trump’s first term saw xenophobic travel bans, loyalty tests and the gutting of the diplomatic corps. But “draining the swamp
” isn’t the solution, even if it means borrowing from Trump’s populist playbook
. Strength plays well
among voters, but strength isn’t only about standing up to adversaries. It’s also about right-sizing relations with allies.
Paeans to U.S. leadership in the Atlantic alliance fall flat. More Republicans and independents support decreasing security commitments, especially in Europe.
Trump’s browbeating of NATO countries to increase their defense spending put the issue of burden-sharing on the political agenda. As president, Trump presided over an increase
in European defense spending. And the prospect of his return has prompted a vigorous debate
on the future of America’s role in the alliance. Most Americans likely prefer
a middle ground that preserves NATO while empowering Europe to stand on its own.
America’s commitments are increasingly seen as liabilities, not assets: Ukraine and the Middle East risk entangling the U.S. in catastrophic conflicts. Washington’s handling of these conflicts gives the impression
that it respects other nations’ agency more than its own, moving glacially to leverage its considerable aid and arms.
Trump stokes these notions effectively. He accuses the Biden-Harris administration of sleepwalking into World War III
while dubiously framing himself as a peacemaker
. In the swing states
, he is seen as more likely than Harris to end both the Ukraine and Gaza wars.
Harris has not effectively countered this narrative. Dismissing territorial concessions in Ukraine as appeasement doesn’t inspire confidence among most Americans
, who want a negotiated settlement or de-escalation.
Ukraine’s cause is just, but clarity on the endgame is needed
. A frank discussion on the extent of U.S. support to Ukraine to defend itself while not creating unacceptable risk for the United States and its allies.
Harris is trying to rebuke Trump’s capricious unilateralism. But resurrecting yesterday’s foreign policy consensus will only feed more mistrust. The challenge is to break the perception of the U.S. as a hapless superpower.
Washington needn’t dictate allies’ policies, but it must make clear that America’s interests come first. It’s a hard chord to strike, but one that could resonate with voters listening for a foreign policy that truly serves them.
Lucas Robinson is a senior research associate at the nonprofit Institute for Global Affairs.
An apparent U.S. intelligence breach related to Israel’s plans to strike Iran has unsettled the intelligence community and sent the Biden administration scrambling to determine if it came from a hack or an internal leak.
The breach, first posted to the Telegram messaging app Friday, comes as the globe has been bracing for an Israeli retaliatory strike on Iran since Tehran fired some 180 ballistic missiles at Israel on Oct. 1 in response for the killings of top leaders in Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran’s prized proxies.
The FBI, aided by the Pentagon and intelligence agencies, is now investigating the unauthorized leak. Here’s what we know so far:
What was in the leak?
The leaked reports in question include one from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which analyzes satellite imagery, and one from the National Security Agency, which intercepts communications. Both were dated Oct. 16 and held highly classified information.
The documents were only meant to be viewed by the “Five Eyes” — the U.S. and its allies Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom.
Screenshots of the documents — first published on an Iran-linked Telegram account and circulated on social media — show descriptions of Israel’s possible plans for an attack on Iran, including the types of aircraft and munitions its military might use. The reports do not suggest Israel’s potential targets, but say a strike could come without forewarning.
The top-secret assessments detail U.S. tracking of Israeli airfield activity Oct. 15-16, to include the movement of munitions such as air-launched ballistic missiles and air-to-surface missiles.
The U.S. also observed an exercise “likely to practice air-to-air refueling and combat search and rescue operations with a large number of aircraft,” something that would be needed should Israeli fighter jets be used to strike Iran.
White House response
The Biden administration quickly condemned the leak.
“We’re deeply concerned, and the president remains deeply concerned, about any leakage of classified information into the public domain,” White House national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters Monday.
“That is not supposed to happen, and it’s unacceptable when it does.”
Kirby also revealed that a Pentagon investigation was seeking to determine whether the documents were a hack or a leak.
On Tuesday, the FBI revealed it had launched an investigation into the incident and was “working closely with our partners in the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community.”
The FBI’s involvement is notable given that it investigates violations of the Espionage Act, the U.S. law that makes it illegal to retain or disclose national defense information.
A U.S. official told The Associated Press
the investigation also was meant to glean if other intelligence information was compromised, and who had access to the documents before they were posted.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Monday the U.S. military takes “these types of things very seriously, very, very seriously, and we investigate things if there is any type of incident.”
The administration appears shaken given the incident’s similarity to last year’s leaking of classified documents from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency by Jack Teixeira, an Air National Guard member from Massachusetts.
Teixeira pleaded guilty in March to leaking hundreds of secret military documents about Russia’s war on Ukraine and other national defense information.
Pentagon pushes back on reports
The Pentagon on Tuesday declined to comment on its role in the probe but said that Austin has spoken with his Israeli counterpart about the matter.
“The investigation is in its first few days, so it’s important to let that investigation run its course,” press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder told reporters.
The Pentagon also has denied allegations linking a specific Defense Department staffer to the leaks: Ariane Tabatabai, the chief of staff to Christopher Maier, the assistant secretary of Defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict.
Foreign outlets have circulated reports that she is to blame, but Ryder denied her culpability.
“To my knowledge, this official is not a subject of interest, and the department remains fully committed to supporting the investigation,” he said.
GOP quick with criticism
Republican politicians quickly jumped on the leak, while former President Trump added his voice to the fray Tuesday when he suggested without evidence that “enemies from within” were responsible for the breach.
“They leaked all the information about the way that Israel’s going to fight and how they are going to fight and where they are going to go,” Trump said Tuesday at a campaign event focused on Latino leaders.
“Can you imagine somebody doing that? That’s the enemy. I guess that maybe is the enemy from within, as I talked about,” he added.
“We just can’t stand for this incompetence anymore.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Sunday said he was alarmed by the incident.
“The leak is very concerning. There’s some serious allegations being made there, an investigation underway, and I’ll get a briefing on that in a couple of hours,” Johnson said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
And Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.) warned that the United States needs to deal with its “leaky ships” and that the Israel intelligence leak should be considered an “act of treason.”
Israel’s looming retaliation
Israel is expected to launch a retaliatory strike on Iran following Tehran’s missile barrage on the country earlier this month, which was in response to the killings of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran in July and Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut in September.
Washington has been trying to steer its ally away from striking Iranian nuclear or oil sites, as U.S. officials fear such a move could further inflame the region on top of Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip and against Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The intelligence leak comes after Israel killed Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, the mastermind of the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, during which Hamas soldiers killed more than 1,200 civilians and set off the Gaza war.
President Biden and Vice President Harris are now calling for a cease-fire to end the conflict and release the hostages still in Hamas captivity.
