Wampum

Univsersal Test

During the first Presidential debate, John Kerry was asked about the doctrine of preemption. Kerry, who had previously stated that "I'll never give a veto to any country over our security," replied as follows:

The president always has the right, and always has had the right, for pre-emptive strike. That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War. And it was always one of the things we argued about with respect to arms control.

No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.

But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

President Bush is trying to make hay from that statement. His stump speech now includes the following:

In the debate -- in the debate, Senator Kerry also said something revealing when he laid out the Kerry doctrine. He said -- he said that America has to pass a global test before we can use American troops to defend ourselves.

That's what he said...Think about this, Senator Kerry's approach to foreign policy would give foreign governments veto power over our national security decisions. I have a different view...When our country is in danger, the President's job is not to take an international poll. The President's job is to defend America. I'll continue to work every day with our friends and allies for the sake of freedom and peace. But our national security decisions will be made in the Oval Office, not in foreign capitals...

That, of course, is a ridiculous and intentional misrepresentation of Senator Kerry's position.

If Mr. Kerry did not mean that other countries have a veto over our security policy, what did he mean by a global test?

William Selatan says it is a test of policy versus reality:

It's clear from Kerry's first sentence that the "global test" doesn't prevent unilateral action to protect ourselves. But notice what else Kerry says. The test includes convincing "your countrymen" that your reasons are clear and sound. Kerry isn't just talking about satisfying France. He's talking about satisfying Ohio. He's talking about you.

What do you have in common with a Frenchman? Look again at Kerry's words. He says the test is to "prove" that our reasons for attacking were legitimate. In the next sentence, he gives an example of someone failing that test: Colin Powell's February 2003 presentation to the United Nations about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. What did Powell apologize for? The inaccuracy of our intelligence. Kerry contrasts this with the trust France once placed in American spy photos.

Proof, intelligence, spy photos. The pattern is obvious. The test isn't moral. It's factual. What you and the Frenchman share is the evidence of your senses. The global test is the measurement of the president's assertions against the real world, the world you and I can see.

Brad DeLong and Mark Kleiman, two great minds thinking alike, note that Kerry's statement is akin to Thomas Jefferson's great phrase in the Declaration of Independence:

When... it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another... a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...

Tgirsch of Lean Left thinks Kerry was simply talking about "credibility and respect."

Juan Cole goes to the dictionary to determine the meaning of "global":

What does "global" mean in this sentence? Well, let's work down. It clearly does not mean "spherical," so that is out.

But it clearly also cannot mean "worldwide," which is what the attack ads, and Condi Rice, are implying. The "global test" Kerry speaks of relates in his mind to convincing "your countrymen" of the legitimacy of what you are doing, first and foremost. Convincing your own citizens cannot possibly be a "worldwide" matter. It is only in the last clause of the sentence where the rest of the world comes up. And there, Kerry is not suggesting that it be asked its opinion beforehand. He used the past tense. He is saying that only by first passing the global test with Americans could the US hope, after the fact, to prove to the world that what had been done was legitimate...

So, if "global" here does not mean "spherical" and does not mean "worldwide," then what does it mean? Kerry was obviously using the word in the third sense above, of "complete." Military action has to pass a complete test, in order to gain the entire confidence of the US public, in preparation for making a convincing case in the aftermath of the war to other countries.

Just for fun, let's pose a counterfactual. Suppose Kerry, instead of using the phrase "global test," had used the phrase "universal test" with "universal" meaning, in the words of my dictionary, "comprehensively broad and versatile." What would have happened?

Two things. First, Mr. Bush would have taken to the stump to decry the fact that the Kerry Doctrine would turn our security policy over to aliens.

Senator Kerry's approach to foreign policy would give aliens governments veto power over our national security decisions. I have a different view...When our country is in danger, the President's job is not to take an intergalatic poll. The President's job is to defend America. [O]ur national security decisions will be made in the Oval Office, not on Alpha Centauri...

Secondly, Fox News would run a interview with a member of Klingon's for Kerry (link via Teresa). Fox News would express surprise and regret when it was discovered that the group did not consist of real Klingons.

Posted by Dwight Meredith at October 4, 2004 01:49 PM | TrackBack