The future of neoconservatives
Josh Marshall debated Richard Perle on the future of the neoconservative movement. You can access a C-SPAN video of the debate here. Marshall’s take on Perle: Richard Perle… ended up in person being about as gentlemanly and fair-minded as his view of foreign affairs and America’s posture on the world stage would lead you to ...
Josh Marshall debated Richard Perle on the future of the neoconservative movement. You can access a C-SPAN video of the debate here. Marshall's take on Perle:
Josh Marshall debated Richard Perle on the future of the neoconservative movement. You can access a C-SPAN video of the debate here. Marshall’s take on Perle:
Richard Perle… ended up in person being about as gentlemanly and fair-minded as his view of foreign affairs and America’s posture on the world stage would lead you to expect.
Greg Djerejian thinks Marshall might be overly sensitive on this point:
With all due respect to Josh, I think this is unfair to Perle. True, Perle made some snide references to the views of “Mr. Marshall” and his “friends,” but he’s a long-time bureaucratic operative with sharp elbows. In other words, it’s part of his makeup and style to debate in this fashion Put differently, it’s likely a different style of debate than, say, that found defending doctoral dissertations at Brown. I don’t say that to poke fun at Josh Marshall–I mean it seriously. Perle and Marshall likely have very different debating styles with Perle more aggressive and Marshall more conventionally polite and, perhaps, a tad docile compared to Perle.
With all due respect to Greg, any academic worth their salt is used to raucous and rancorous debates. Greg’s post — a nice substitute for the two-hour video — argues that Perle’s description of neoconservatism “felt very much like sober-headed foreign policy realism–rather than the oft-described messianic exportation of democracy doctrines (or some grossly deluded neo-Wilsonian style project).” I’m afraid I’ve got to disagree with Greg again. First of all, most realists opposed the war in Iraq. Second, I’m not sure how much neoconservatives think or want Perle to be their exemplar. I’ve expressed my reservations about Perle in the past, so I might be biased here. UPDATE: Belgravia Dispatch responds (additional posts here and here) In response to the response, I probably should have said “academic” realists rather than pragmatic policy types — though I’m pretty sure the Scowcroft camp was none too thrilled with the war either.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for World Brief
FP’s flagship evening newsletter guiding you through the most important world stories of the day. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
