Why must our foreign policy debate be controlled by the extremes?

The only reason so many are confused by such voters is because the foreign policy conversation in Washington is so out-of-touch with typical American instincts.

Yes, the debate here is dominated by the “We must intervene across the globe and spread democracy” crowd and the “these global threats are always overrated” crowd. What’s worse is that these two sides yell at each other and call each other crazy (an old problem going back to at least Aristotle and Plato), leading to very little compromise and thoughtful foreign policy approaches. Add to all this that many players in this debate seek to score political points and go for the win rather than make a compelling and unifying case based on our national interests.

Sadly, we don’t have many inspirational voices right now, much less an executive, who discuss and communicate a coherent foreign policy based primarily on our national interest. We need to define what our interests are and communicate their importance. Without clear communication both internally and externally, nobody knows what’s important and foreign countries may be mightily confused about how far they can push us. The result is frequently a sloppy approach where politicians do what they can without the American public weighing in.