YES, THE “GLOBAL TEST” DOES CHARACTERIZE KERRY’S FOREIGN POLICY

It’s true that one may explain away Kerry’s “global test” remark by referring to the “context,” i.e. to other things he said in the debate. Bush is perceived as a strong president, so Kerry frequently imitates him. Thus, if you look at the context of the global test remark, there are plenty of Bush-isms to offset the bow to internationalism.

No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do 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.

Will Saletan has an unconvincing article (which is also where I got the Kerry quote) along these lines. (His argument, unfortunately, amounts to little more than joining the conspiracy of amnesia about the universality of the pre-war belief that Saddam had WMDs.) The Boston Globe angrily disdains the “global test” meme and the “Kerry doctrine” which the Bushies claim it implies. Both arguments use certain of Kerry's Bush-like utterances to dismiss the charge that Kerry would submit American defense to a global test.

The trouble is that, in the context of Kerry’s whole career, the “global test” seems like a very good summary of the succession of Kerry’s positions, almost of his entire raison d’etre as politician. Here’s an excellent retrospective from redstate.org:

1.

The North Vietnamese, during the Vietnam War, compared Ho Chi Minh to George Washington, argued that their war was one of national liberation, accused US troops of regularly committing war crimes and atrocities, called on Nixon to end the war immediately, argued that the people of South Vietnam would be happy to accept communism, and generally argued that the US war in Vietnam was immoral from beginning to end. John Kerry, during the Vietnam War, compared Ho Chi Minh to George Washington, argued that the North's war was one of national liberation, accused US troops of regularly committing war crimes and atrocities, called on Nixon to end the war immediately, argued that the people of South Vietnam would be happy to accept communism, and generally argued that the US war in Vietnam was immoral from beginning to end.
2. The Soviet Union and its allies denounced the US invasion of Grenada in 1983. John Kerry denounced the US invasion of Grenada in 1983.
3. The Soviets, in the 1980s, denounced Ronald Reagan as a warmonger and a threat to peace for deploying missiles in Western Europe. John Kerry, in the 1980s, denounced Ronald Reagan as a warmonger and a threat to peace for deploying missiles in Western Europe.
4. Daniel Ortega, in the 1980s, denounced US support for the Nicaraguan contras and argued that the US should have peace talks with his regime. John Kerry, in the 1980s, denounced US support for the Nicaraguan contras and argued that the US should have peace talks with Ortega's regime.
5. Moammar Qaddafi argued that Reagan's bombing of Libya was unjustified and caused excessive civilian casualties. John Kerry argued that Reagan's bombing of Libya was unjustified and caused excessive civilian casualties.
6. Our adversaries during and since the Cold War have argued that we were reckless and irresponsible by pursuing missile defense. John Kerry has argued that we were reckless and irresponsible by pursuing missile defense.
7. Fidel Castro has, for decades, regularly denounced US sanctions against Cuba. John Kerry has, for decades, regularly denounced US sanctions against Cuba.
8. In 1991, Saddam Hussein wanted to draw out the process of the Western response in the hopes that it would bog down. John Kerry said we should have drawn out the process.
9. Yasser Arafat has denounced the security fence erected by Israel. John Kerry has denounced the security fence erected by Israel.
We can add four more from the debate alone:
10. In 2002-03, Saddam Hussein wanted to draw out the inspections process and make it more multilateral. John Kerry says we should have drawn out the inspections process and made it more multilateral.
11. Kim Jong-Il wanted to have bilateral talks rather than multilateral talks. John Kerry says we should have had bilateral talks rather than multilateral talks.
12. Osama bin Laden says we helped him by invading Iraq. John Kerry says we helped bin Laden by invading Iraq.
13. The Iranian mullahs oppose US sanctions against Iran, wish to enter into agreements with the US, and insist that there are plausible reasons why a poor but oil-rich country needs nuclear power. John Kerry opposes US sanctions against Iran, argues that we should enter into agreements with Iran, and insists that there are plausible reasons why a poor but oil-rich country needs nuclear power.

A charitable interpretation of John Kerry’s habit of echoing the views of our critics and our enemies is that “global” voices should have a hearing here; that with our huge influence in the world foreigners have a stake in what we do, and if they can’t vote, some of us should take it upon ourselves to vote vicariously for them. In short, John Kerry’s mission throughout his career has been to submit US action to the “global test.” It is the Democrats, not the Republicans, who are ignoring the broader context of the remark.

Beware the word "but" this year. Thus Kerry talks like Bush for show, then says "but," then states his own view. It is the same as in the Iraq war, when people said, "yes, Saddam Hussein was bad, but" and then go on to make what purports to be a counter-point which outweighs the evil of Saddam Hussein's regime, apparently only because of its grammatical position since the clause that follows "but" represents a fact of much smaller importance. To paraphrase Samuel Johnson, the word "but" is the last refuge of a scoundrel.