As President Elect Obama assembles his new foreign policy/national security team, there have been a number of comments and observations made by various interest groups. Those on the far left are upset that he has not appointed enough ‘progressives’ to the team while those on the far right are convinced he is ready to give away the store by not naming enough hard-liners.

Of course most of us have the more mainstream response to say he has assembled a pretty good team and that they should serve us pretty well. However, even among those who support his choices, there has been a claim that he has gone to the Clinton administration and that there is a strong southern accent around the NSC and the State Department.

But for me the accent is less Little Rock and more Leipzig….

Just in case you didn’t catch the reference, I think Obama is following the kind of national security/foreign policy espoused by Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. I’m sure some on the left would be outraged at the comparison, but remember that even most Nixon critics point to his success in the foreign policy arena.

Admittedly my reaction may be partly based in the fact that I recently began to read Kissinger’s memoirs (a long project since it’s a 3-volume series at about 1500 pages per volume). Indeed you will probably see other posts as the months go by and I make my way through the volumes.

But looking to the comparison between Obama/Clinton and Nixon/Kissinger there are some striking similarities. Like Obama, Nixon inherited a war that began with the best of intentions but deteriorated into a quagmire. Like Nixon, Obama will have to find a way to extract us from the war without causing damage to our position around the world.

Both men also sought to make changes in the way we dealt with some of our enemies. When Nixon first took office, the idea of reaching out to China and signing treaties with Russia was as controversial as reaching out to Cuba or North Korea. I’m not saying that Obama will be able to work a way to reach out to these nations but there is at least an opportunity for him to try.

If this comparison does pan out, then I think we have some improvements to look forward to. The central premise of the Nixonian foreign policy was that pragmatism is the key factor. While in theory it is a nice idea for us to bring freedom and democracy to the entire world this is not always practical (I won’t mention a specific country but I think one is popping into your mind right now).

This of course does not mean that if we can accomplish positive things by helping out the less fortunate around the world that we should not do so. That is part of the duty of the powerful, to help the weak whenever we can. But at the core United States Foreign Policy is just that… OUR foreign policy and in the end it is the duty of the President to do what is best for us first.

So how will Obama carry out these new policies ?

Wait for Part II to see how I think it will go, or feel free to comment away.