Feingold offers foreign policy alternative

The death of Abu Musab al Zarqawi offers a great opportunity for the Democrats to do a better job outlining to the American people in this election year exactly what their foreign policy strategy really is.  Senator Russ Feingold is onto something.  Here is an excerpt from his column that was posted on the Huffington Post web site thie morning, where he calls for U.S. forces to be redeployed from Iraq to fight terrorist cells across the globe:

The first step in creating a strong national security policy isrecognizing that our massive presence in Iraq weakens our nationalsecurity. Our Iraq-centric policies are diverting resources andattention from other places around the world where terrorist networksthat threaten the U.S. are operating. We need to redeploy troops fromIraq so that we can focus resources on global terrorist networks andthe conditions throughout the world that allow them to take root andthrive. I have repeatedly called for our troops to redeploy from Iraqby the end of 2006, and have filed an amendment to the Department ofDefense authorization bill - which the Senate will be taking up nextweek - that would give that deadline the force of law.

It's time to return to our true national security mission in thewake of 9/11 by crafting a comprehensive strategy to fight terrorism.Our approach must be global, taking into consideration that our enemiescan move easily in places with little or no governance, and can use21st century technology to communicate, plan, and even execute attacksagainst us. This strategy must focus on developing strong partnershipswith countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, and Mali, focused notonly on security assistance, but on the development of a strong rule oflaw, respect for human rights, and fighting corruption.

A comprehensive strategy to fight terrorism must also addresscountries like Somalia. Failed states like Somalia are the breedinggrounds for terrorism and instability. We know that this East Africancountry is home to a range of terrorist and criminal networks thatoperate throughout the region. Yet, the U.S. government currently hasno strategy to eliminate the conditions that allow these terrorists totrain, equip, rest, and plan. Our budget for programs to counter theseconditions is a mere $2 million per year, excluding food aid. That'sroughly $1.6 billion less than we are spending on Iraq every week.

Some vision is always better than no vision at all.  Russ Feingold, John Murtha, John Kerry and Wesley Clark have been the only Democrats to offer a comprehensive plan, as opposed to merely trashing the status-quo.  If you think that the Administration and their Republican counterparts do not offer a strong long-term national security strategy, then say so and critique what is wrong about it.  But in the end, be sure to lay down an alternative -- not just because it would help the Democrats in an election year, but more importantly because the United States is at a point where it needs a clearly defined set strategy to combat worldwide terrorism in this fast-paced information age.