التقرير الأسبوعي لمراكز الأبحاث الاميركية

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The pace in the Washington think tank community slowed down as analysts left town for summer vacations.  Although there were a smaller number of significant papers, they covered a wide range of topics.

 

This week, the Think Tank Monitor has produced in depth analysis on the upcoming presidential election in the US and the potential candidates on the Republican side.  The analysis not only includes the major candidates, but others that are unlikely to win the nomination, but may end up being chosen as the vice presidential nominee.

 

The Nonproliferation Policy Education Center (NPEC) made headlines when it predicted that Iran could produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb in just eight weeks.  It concluded, “Overall Iran continues to make increasingly rapid progress towards acquiring the ability to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons completely unimpeded by any Western counteraction.  Using its current stockpiles of 3.5% enriched uranium and 19.7% enriched uranium, Iran can now produce a weapon’s worth (20 kilograms) of HEU any time it wishes.  With Iran’s current number of operating centrifuges, the batch recycling process would take about two months… Unfortunately, it is unclear what actions the U.S. or Israel could take (short of militarily occupying Iran) that could now prevent Iran from producing nuclear weapons.  The reality is that both the U.S. and Israel have failed to prevent Iran from gaining the ability to produce nuclear weapons whenever Iran wishes to do so.  It is time to recognize this policy failure and decide what to do next, based on a realistic assessment of Iran’s uranium enrichment efforts.” 

 

The Brookings Institution looks at the death of another Al Qaeda leader, Kashmire and its impact.  They noted, “Kashmiri's demise won't solve all the problems in the tortured American relationship with Pakistan by any means but it will help.  Of course, if Kashmiri is not dead and reappears yet again unscathed, it will only add to his credentials. Bin Laden benefited enormously from surviving the cruise missile attack that targeted him in 1998. Recriminations could damage the Pakistani-American relationship further. Nonetheless those are risks worth taking. In either case we will know soon. Al Qaeda is quick to eulogize its martyrs. If Kashmiri's dead, they will say so.”

 

The Council on Foreign Relations looks at the same killings and asks if such targeted killings are lawful. CFR's Matthew Waxman cautions against overreliance on them as a counterterrorism tool but says so far U.S. policy is within legal bounds. Constitutional lawyer Pardiss Kebriaei questions the legal basis that U.S. administrations have used to justify killing suspected terrorists off the battlefield, suggesting a violation of constitutional rights of due process. Decapitating terrorist networks is an effective strategy, says Georgetown's Daniel Byman, capable of robbing a group of charismatic leadership critical to its success. But Afghanistan expert Kate Clark argues that targeted killings often produce an organizational chaos that unleashes a more radical generation of subordinates.

 

The Washington Institute looked at the status of Iraqi security forces in preparation for US forces withdrawing from the country.  Beyond the immediate operational challenges of maintaining internal security, combating terrorism, and securing the borders against smuggling and foreign incursions, the ISF will face numerous long-term institutional challenges related to training, equipment, civil-military relations, corruption, and politicization.

 

The CSIS looks at the problems in Pakistan and their influence on events in the region.  They note, “At the same time, the US, its allies in ISAF, and the Afghan government need every bit of military, and counterterrorism cooperation from Pakistan they can get. Even limited Pakistani intelligence support is crucial in providing them with an understanding of militant dynamics. They are also dependent on a logistic tail that keeps them reliant on a transit route through Pakistan. Pakistan’s leverage in dissuading American pressure is further increased by the fact that the US is deeply unpopular in Pakistan This creates major problems for both the US and Pakistan in finding some practical way to create a truly effective strategic relationship, as well as making the success of economic and military aid uncertain, and sharply restricting the future ability for the US to transform its role from one of constant pressure on Pakistan to that of a real strategic partner.  The fundamental realties of Pakistan’s external relations are all too similar to those of its internal problems. Only Pakistan can save Pakistan. This can never happen as long as its leadership elite pursues policies where its definitions of “victory” that fail the nation and its people, and really mean defeat.”

 

The Carnegie Endowment looks at Syria’s nuclear program.  When the IAEA’s main decision-making body, the board of governors, meets in Vienna this week, Syria’s nuclear activities will be front and center. In a new Q&A, Mark Hibbs says the board will likely vote in favor of a resolution—prepared by a group of Western nations, including the United States—condemning Syria’s failure to cooperate with the IAEA’s probe of the allegation and may declare Syria out of compliance with its bilateral safeguards agreement with the IAEA and the nonproliferation treaty. Citing Syria for noncompliance would bring the matter to the attention of the United Nations Security Council and open the door to possible future sanctions. But sanctions in the near term are unlikely

 

A battle is brewing between Congress and Obama on the War Powers Act, which requires Obama to get congressional approval for actions in Libya.  This he has refused to do.  The Heritage Foundation warns, “How Congress responds to the sorry situation created by the President is the most important issue at stake. Congress should act in a manner that respects and preserves the constitutional authorities of the commander in chief. It should advocate for what is in the best interests of all Americans. It should be mindful of commitments made to its brothers-in-arms. In doing the right thing, Congress has the opportunity to demonstrate real leadership to the White House and the American people.

 

 

 

 

The June 6^th Washington Post/ABC News poll that showed Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney leading Barak Obama 49% to 46% amongst registered voters has redirected attention back to the race for the Republican presidential nomination.  What looked like a thin, uninspiring field just a month ago has begun to galvanize Republican voters with its depth and variety.

 

This has been especially true this week.  Two politicians announced that they were running for the Republican nomination (Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum).  Former Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin took a widely publicized trip of the Northeastern United States on a bus, and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, hired Ed Rollins, who has been campaign manager for President Ronald Regan and Mike Huckabee.

 

For ease, we will split the potential candidates into three groups: Those who have a solid base in the Republican Party (Romney, Palin, Pawlenty, and Cain).  Second tier candidates who are attracting serious attention (Bachmann, Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum).  And third tier candidates who probably won’t win, but may are mentioned because they may be picked as a vice presidential nominee or because they make the race interesting.

 

The biggest news this week for Mitt Romney wasn’t that he announced he was running for president, but that the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll showed him beating Obama in the race for president.  Republicans may have problems with some of his policies, but beating Obama trumps all of those.

 

Romney is a familiar name in Republican politics.  His father George Romney was governor of Michigan and was once a presidential candidate in 1968.  Although George Romney was originally seen as the front runner for the Republican nomination in 1968, his campaign faltered and Richard Nixon was nominated.

 

In that regard, Mitt Romney’s presidential aspirations’ seemed to mimic his father’s.  A serious candidate in 2008, he finally lost out to John McCain.  This year, he has been portrayed as the “front runner,” but he has failed to inspire many of the grass roots Republicans.

 

The biggest problem is that Romney, as the former governor of Massachusetts, was perceived as been more liberal than most Republicans.  He instituted a state health care program that was similar in many ways to Obama’s national health care program.  He was also seen as not being pro-gun, a major problem with the Republican base.  He has also advocated the concept of manmade global warming, something not believed by most Republicans.  Finally, he is also a Mormon, which bothers many Christian Republicans

 

But Romney has strengths.  He was a successful businessman and is wealthy enough to help fund his own presidential campaign.  In addition, his Mormon background gives him a base of support in several Western states like Utah, Nevada, and Arizona. 

 

The early part of the 2012 presidential primary season will represent a mixed bag for Romney.  New Hampshire is near to Massachusetts and could give him an early win, although he came in second place in 2008 to McCain.  And, Nevada, which has many Mormons could provide him with a base of support as it did in 2008.

 

The two other states, South Carolina and Iowa are more problematical since they are more conservative.  He came in second in Iowa to Huckabee in 2008, but ended up in 4^th place in South Carolina.  His success in these states depends a lot on who else is running.  Palin (if she runs), Bachmann, and Pawlenty would all beat Romney in Iowa, which is the first test of presidential popularity in 2012.  Bachman, Palin, and Cain would be serious threats in South Carolina.

 

However, at this time, Romney has the right to the status as front runner.  He has an organization throughout the country, he has money and serious financial supporters, and he has a poll that shows he can beat Obama.  Those are credentials that can’t be ignored.

 

After several months out of the public eye, former Alaska governor and 2008 presidential Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin hit the headlines with a bus tour of historical places in the Northeast United States like the Statue of Liberty, the Gettysburg battlefield, the Liberty Bell, and the Bunker Hill battlefield.  Everyone agreed that for someone who hasn’t announced, she sure acted like a presidential candidate.

 

Palin’s profile will also be raised in the coming months by a two hour movie that will introduce her again to the public.  It has received good reviews from those who have seen it.  It will be shown in several early primary states.

 

If Palin enters the presidential race, she will have a major impact.  Although polls show she has poor ratings with independents, she has a strong core of support within the Republican Party – especially the conservative wing.  Her entry could therefore have an impact on other conservatives like Cain and Bachmann – denying them votes and money.

 

However, Palin, unlike other “non candidates” doesn’t have a shadow campaign team throughout the country.  If she announces, she will have to quickly build up a 50 state organization.  Since many of the better campaign professionals have already teamed up with other candidates, she may have problems putting together a professional team to oversee her campaign.

 

At this point of time, it appears that Palin is still undecided.  She would have strength in two early primary states – South Carolina and Iowa, but she is aware that she must reverse her strong negatives amongst many voters to be a competitive candidate in the general election.

 

This is the reason for the bus tours (several are scheduled for later this summer) and the movie about her.  If these can raise her popularity with those groups of voters who don’t like her now, she may very well enter the race.

 

A recent straw poll in Arizona to determine the preferred candidate for president amongst GOP activists had a surprising winner – Herman Cain with 51%.  A Public Policy Polling survey of Republican primary voters had him coming in one point behind Pawlenty and just four points behind the front runners Romney and Palin.

 

So, who is this presidential candidate that was relatively unknown to Republicans a few months ago and is still unknown to many independents and Democrats?  And, why is he exciting GOP activists?

 

Herman Cain is a Conservative, black businessman.  He is best known as the former chairman and CEO of Godfather's Pizza. He was a former Vice President of Pillsbury.  He is a former deputy chairman (1992–94) and chairman (1995–96) of the civilian board of directors to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. Before his business and economics career he worked as a mathematician in ballistics for the United States Navy.  He was a commentator for Fox News.

 

Although he has been active in politics for years (he lost the nomination for senator in Georgia in 2004), he has come to the forefront recently as a speaker at many Tea Party events.  As a stirring speaker with conservative positions, he has excited many.  And, as a black conservative, he has helped the Tea party counter claims that it is racist.

 

Like Romney, much of his experience comes from the business world, although he does have considerable experience with the Federal Reserve.  However, he comes from a modest background – his father was a chauffeur and his mother was a maid.  Unlike the younger Obama, he experienced segregation in the US.

 

Cain has several advantages.  As a successful businessman, he is rich enough that he has been able to help his own campaign financially.  He is also an excellent orator, in the tradition of Black Baptist pastors.  His conservative views have excited the conservative base of the Republican Party in a way few of the other candidates have.  And as a black, Republicans see him as a way to counter the inevitable charges of racism that will be laid against the GOP in 2012.

 

Being black will not be a major advantage in the presidential race.  Since most blacks are Democrats, his race will not be an advantage in the primaries.  And, it is questionable if he can take many black votes away from Obama in the general election. 

 

Cain’s success will depend on how well he does in early primaries.  South Carolina would be his best breakout state, but how he finishes in Iowa will set the tone.  If he can show that he can successfully compete for the conservative vote with Michele Bachmann (and possibly Sarah Palin) in Iowa, he may be able to build up the momentum necessary to carry him to the convention.

 

A seemingly bland former governor from the Democratic state of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty has managed to claw his way into the top tier of Republican candidates through perseverance.  He doesn’t have the enthusiastic base of Palin or Cain, but he has a solid record of achievement as governor in the traditionally Democratic state of Minnesota.  Unlike Romney, he didn’t veer from Republican principles as governor either.  He does have a solid record of balancing the Minnesota budget by cutting spending and not raising taxes.  And, in a Public Policy Polling survey of Republican primary voters, he was in third place behind Romney and Palin.

 

Pawlenty has several strengths.  As a successful governor from a normal Democratic state, he has the crossover appeal for Democrats and independents who are necessary to win a general election.  And, he has the conservative positions to make the Republican base support him. 

 

He was a McCain presidential campaign co-chairman and was considered a strong possibility to be McCain vice presidential pick.  If Palin doesn’t run, Pawlenty could receive the tacit endorsement of Senator McCain.

 

In the presidential primary process, Pawlenty has one advantage – his closeness to Iowa.  As the governor of neighboring Minnesota, he would have a slight geographic edge, providing Michele Bachmann (conservative and also from Minnesota) doesn’t run. 

 

Although he isn’t inspiring many, his solid credentials as governor, his political stands, and his strength in Democratic areas of the nation, give him a solid base, especially if some of the front runners fall down.

 

 

One Republican observer described Michele Bachmann as, “Sarah Palin without the baggage.”  Although she has the same conservative credentials of Palin, she has arguably more political experience (including over 4 years in the US congress), an enthusiastic base, and less negatives.  If Palin doesn’t run, she will pick up many of the Palin supporters.

 

Although Bachmann hasn’t declared she is running, she recently hired Ed Rollins.  Rollins who was the campaign manager for President Regan’s 1984 campaign and Mike Huckabee’s 2008 run.  She has also hired the Republican pollster Ed Goeas.  They represent a solid professional base for a run at the White House.

 

She has a solid professional resume, including being a lawyer for the IRS.  She spent four years in the Minnesota Senate before going to Washington.  In addition to having five children, she was a foster mother to 23 other children.  She is probably the biggest advocate of the Tea Party in Washington.

 

Of all of the major candidates, Bachmann has some national security experience.  She is a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, giving her a role as overseer of the CIA, the National Security Agency and the rest of the U.S. intelligence community.  She also lived in the Middle East, having lived on an Israeli Kibbutz the summer after graduating from High School. 

 

Bachmann’s future will depend to a large extent on Palin because they share the same base.  Since she was born in Iowa and is conservative, she should do well in Iowa.  Her conservative credentials should help her in South Carolina.

 

On the down side, as an outspoken congresswoman, she has alienated many in the Republican leadership.  And, as a native Iowan, she will be expected to win the Iowa caucus if she runs.  If she doesn’t, she may quickly fade from the race.  In that case, she might be a potential vice presidential choice, especially if the presidential nominee is someone liberal like Romney.  She would balance out the ticket and encourage conservative Republicans to work for his election.

 

Since Bachmann and Palin share the same political base in the Republican Party, expect Bachman to highlight her experience in order to differentiate her from the former Alaskan governor.

 

 

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has also announced that he is running for President.   Although his achievements in helping the Republicans to win the House of Representatives in 1994 with the “Contract with America” would earn him a legitimate position in the presidential primary, his personal life and poorly chosen comments have scuttled his campaign.  Although he has name recognition and a formidable political background, his position in the polls is poor and his negatives are high. 

 

Gingrich has a tendency to make statements that outrage conservatives – those who should be his natural base.  After declaring his candidacy, he told reporters that Congressman Paul Ryan’s plan to cut the federal deficit as “right-wing social engineering.”  In 2009, he was nearly alone in endorsing Dede Scozzafava in the special House election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District.  The infighting within the Republican/Conservative voters guaranteed a Democratic win in a normally Republican district.

 

Gingrich has also had many embarrassing personal events including affairs.  It was also recently discovered that he had a $500,000 debt with the exclusive New York Jewelers Tiffany.

 

Although an intelligent man, he has neither the voter base nor resources to win the nomination.

 

Although he has previously stated he wouldn’t run for president, Texas Governor Rick Perry has softened his statements to say that he won’t consider it until the end of the current Texas State Legislature session.  If he does, he could join a long list of Texans who have gone to the presidency (4 of the last 11 presidents have been born or lived in Texas - Eisenhower, Johnson, Bush 41 and Bush 43).

 

Perry is the longest serving governor in the US and in Texas history.  He became governor when George Bush resigned as governor in preparation to become president.  He was elected to full terms in 2002, 2006, and 2010. 

 

Perry originally began public service as a Democrat in 1984.  Perry supported Al Gore in the 1988 Democratic presidential primaries and was chairman of the Gore campaign in Texas.  He became a Republican in 1989.

 

As Texas governor, Perry has taken a high profile approach in opposition to Obama.  He has criticized Obama’s economic programs and refused economic stimulus money.  He has also challenged the reach of the federal government in states.  Perry and the legislature have focused on encouraging businesses to expand in Texas.  As a result, Texas is currently creating nearly as many jobs as the rest of the US.

 

As the governor of one of the largest states in the US, Perry has an edge many other Republican candidates don’t have. He has also engendered enthusiasm amongst the conservative Republican base.  In addition, in a year where the economy will be the top concern, the growing Texas economy will be a powerful campaign message.

 

Sarah Palin endorsed Perry in the 2010 election and they became friends.  He may stay out of the race if Palin enters it. However, he may be more likely to run for president if Palin decides to stay out. 

 

On June 6, 2011 Rick Santorum announced he was running for president.  Santorum is a former senator from Pennsylvania.  He won two elections as senator (1994 and 2000).  He lost in 2006.

 

Santorum is a social conservative with a slightly less conservative voting record on fiscal issues like spending.  Santorum was one of only two senators who voted against Robert Gates to become Secretary of Defense. He opposed Gates' advocacy of engaging Iran and Syria to solve the problem, saying that talking to "radical Islam" would be an error.

 

Although Santorum won elections as a Republican in the normally Democratic state of Pennsylvania, he was lucky to run in two years when Republican did well (1994 and 2000).  Therefore he can’t be seen as a Republican that can win over Democrats in a general election.  In a primary where there are more attractive conservative presidential candidates, Santorum will not go far.  However, he might be chosen to fill the vice presidential slot if the nominee thinks Santorum might help win Pennsylvania.

 

JON HUNTSMAN.  Former governor of Utah and Ambassador to China under Obama.  Huntsman also has foreign policy experience under both Presidents Bush.  He was also a staff assistant under Regan.  He has been ambassador to Singapore and Trade representative.  His experience on foreign relations in East Asia is excellent.  He was involved in trade negotiations in Qatar.  He has served on the Brookings Institute Asia Policy Board

 

He is currently weighing a run for president.  Although he has superb foreign relations credentials, his ties to Obama will hurt him.  He is also a Mormon, which means his base will probably be supporting Romney.

 

Huntsman might be a vice presidential possibility, especially for a presidential candidate with a weakness in foreign affairs.

 

 

RUDY GIULIANI. Former mayor of New York City from 1994 to 2001.  He gained a lot of visibility after 9-11.  He also ran for president in 2008.  He is considering a run for president in 2012.

 

Giuliani is a moderate Republican who was able to win election as mayor of New York City, a very Democratic city. As such, he is not favored by the Republican conservative base.  He has also had marital and family problems. 

 

Giuliani would be favored by those who want a moderate Republican, but think Romney has too much bad baggage thanks to his health care plan in Massachusetts.  If Romney falters and the leading presidential candidate is a conservative, moderate and liberal Republicans might turn to him.

 

 

RON  PAUL.  Although Congressman Ron Paul has announced that he is running for president once again (his fourth attempt), he is not considered a serious threat.  However, his strong libertarian views and group of enthusiastic supporters can have an impact on the race.

 

Paul’s views on a small government and non-intervention overseas resonates with many Republican voters (about 10% nationally).  That can siphon votes from more traditional candidates and create upsets.  However, his chances for winning the nomination or becoming the vice presidential nominee are slim.

None of the top candidates are considered foreign policy experts.  Of the ones in the top two tiers, only Michele Bachman (who lived in Israel for a summer and is a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence) and Mitt Romney (who lived in France for over two years) have any serious foreign experience.  As Speaker of the House and part of the national leadership, Newt Gingrich would have had been involved in policy decisions.  However, his expertise is more domestic and economic.

Traditionally, the choice of a vice presidential nominee has taken foreign policy into account.  Dick Cheney, Al Gore,George Bush 41, and Walter Mondale have all been chosen to give some foreign policy balance to a nominee who was a governor.  The same could be true this year too.  In that case, Huntsman could be the obvious choice.  Other choices might include former UN Ambassador John Bolton or former Bush Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.  Bolton has indicated an interest in running for president and his conservative foreign policy stands would help him with the Republican base. We will address in future analysis the candidates’ foreign policy toward the Arab world.