Democracy and Three Alternative National Security Strategies
30 June 2006

In a May 22 Washington Post op-ed, entitled “Reclaiming the Democratic Agenda,” Jackson Diehl highlights Democratic Party efforts to articulate alternative national security strategies.  The op-ed mentions Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s, “Democratic Plan to Protect America and Restore Our Leadership in the World,” but focuses primarily on a book produced by the Progressive Policy Institute, an outgrowth of the Democratic Leadership Council, called “With all Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty.” Diehl argues that the ideas coming out of this project reflect the beliefs of “centrist Democrats” and are likely to be “at the center of the next presidential elections.”

In a different article in the same issue, the Post reports on another national security proposal by the Center for American Progress, a left of center think tank. The report, titled, “Integrated Power: A National Security Strategy for the 21st Century,” was distributed to audience members following a speech by national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley when he unveiled President Bush’s new national security strategy. 

While all three proposals provide comprehensive national security strategies and all three reports identify reducing dependence on foreign oil as a cornerstone of a future national security strategy, only two of the three strategies explicitly embrace the imperative of democracy promotion as part of such a strategy.

Reid’s “Democratic Plan to Protect America,” makes no mention of a link between promoting democratic governance abroad and America’s security interests. As Diehl notes, the document “does not include the word democracy.”

The Progressive Policy Institute’s With all Our Might, on the other hand, retains democracy promotion, especially in the Middle East, as a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy.  While critical of Bush’s approach and inconsistent application, the central thesis remains that democratic expansion is a critical to U.S. national security.  Unlike their Democratic counterparts in other fora, Diehl notes, the authors caution against a speedy withdrawal from Iraq.  Rather they argue, “The fact that President Bush and his team have mismanaged virtually every aspect of postwar reconstruction does not justify an immediate or precipitous withdrawal…instead we should rally the American people for an extended and robust security and reconstruction presence.”

The Center for American Progress’s (CAP) “Integrated Power” report accepts the core thesis that democratic expansion is not only a moral imperative but serves the U.S. long term economic and security interests.  The report emphasizes the necessity of a multilateral approach to democracy promotion that goes beyond elections to develop countries’ capacity to sustain democracy by empowering civil society networks and building democratic institutions.