Wes Clark and.... TA DA! The DLC's Will Marshall: Warming To India

[wyldwolf]

Disclaimer: You don't have to read this post. Anything coming from the DLC must be a bad idea and the fact that Wes Clark is involved only shows what a sell-out puke-lite he is. Right? :sarcasm:


At first glance, President Bush's proposed agreement with India on civil nuclear cooperation is a no-win proposition for the U.S. Senate. Rejecting the deal could chill relations between the world's biggest democracies; approving it might shred America's credibility as a leader of global efforts to restrain nuclear proliferation.

Senators can escape this dilemma, however, by offering the White House a deal of their own: support for the India agreement conditioned on concrete commitments by the Bush administration to breathe new life into the international nonproliferation system.

Under the deal struck last summer, the United States would lift its ban on supplying expertise and fuel to India's civilian nuclear power sector. India agreed to place 14 of its 22 nuclear reactors under safeguards with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The deal is intended to remove the chief irritant in U.S.-India relations: America's longtime policy of banning sales of civilian nuclear technology and fuel to any country -- most prominently India -- that has refused to sign the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

U.S. leaders should not miss the opportunity to forge a true strategic partnership with India. As a stable, multiethnic democracy with a brisk economic growth rate, a vibrant technology sector, an English-speaking middle class, and a potential domestic market four times larger than America's, India is fast emerging as a 21st century power of the first rank.

--snip--

If accompanied by imaginative U.S. efforts to update and strengthen the global nonproliferation system, the proposed deal with India could become a cornerstone of a comprehensive post-Cold War strategy -- but only if elected leaders at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue have the insight and courage to seize this opportunity.

Wesley Clark is NATO's former Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. Will Marshall is president of the Progressive Policy Institute.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253873&kaid=450004&subid=900021

[FrenchieCat]

1. India is an isolated issue....and I find that an Alternative to the two

options previously provided is wise.

Folks (DLC and otherwise) can agree, without it meaning that they agree on every other issue.

I don't believe that DUers who don't necessarily "like" the DLC disagree with everything that they may advocate, just cause it is being proposed by the "DLC". That would be selling DUers very short on their perspectives of various issues, issue by issue.

Personally, I find it unfortunate that you only offered, within your op, your initial comment which addresses a larger context that this alternative is being offered by the DLC or/and that Clark collaborated in penning the article..... as opposed to offering your analysis on the proposal itself and adding your own views as they relate to this specific issue, which will be coming up for a vote, and an issue that many have not really looked into to date.

I think that labeling this as a (tada) DLC stance and leaving it at that without commenting on your views is not helping others gain a perspective that even the DLC can be right (you know, like a broken Clock might be twice a day)

The fact that Wes Clark is in agreement with the DLC on proposing an alternative approach on this that Democrats could take (as there are so many DLC members in the Senate and the house) is not cause to make this issue about the DLC nor about Wes Clark.

The issue should be about India and US's role, and the fact that it provides an alternative to the only two options thus far offered.

So, I guess I am asking, what do you think of what is being proposed as an alternative?

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. I read it , and it makes a lot of sense to me

I understand that those on DU who defend the DLC feel under fairly constant attack, which explains your sarcastic disclaimer, but I too wish you kept that disclaimer out of the OP itself because it serves to divert attention from a worth while subject for discussion. It would have gone down better if you made it in an immediate first post follow up. Anyway...

This is a thorough and thoughtful presentation that weaves together many somewhat separate but ultimately related threads into a single blanket proposal. Good for them. This proposal also transcends typical two party politics so there is no reason why it shouldn't transcend some of the sometimes splits we have within our own policy between DLC backers and opponents.

And this proposal should help transcend some of the distrust and animosity present in the world community, offering a common set of standards to apply to all, including the call for the U.S. to honor it's commitment to move faster toward nuclear disarmament. Bush set us on a collision course with India and Pakistan. Pakistan isn't happy with his diplomacy, and India will be furious if the U.S. pulls back from promises that Bush made now. But the promises that Bush made present real problems if they are enacted without further reforms. Hopefully this proposal will help break the United Sates out of a potential lose/lose box that Bush put us in.

[Texas_Kat]

3. I took a look at the article

and was frankly surprised and pleased that the DLC seems to finally recognize that no Democratic organization can ignore National Security and foreign policy.

I'm definitely not a DLC fan, but I'll have to congratulate them on this one.

[wyldwolf]

4. I'm a bit confused by your response

You're surprised and pleased that the DLC seems to finally recognize that no Democratic organization can ignore National Security and foreign policy?

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. I know the DLC has been good on Darfur also

And it wouldn't surprise me to learn of some other areas of agreement with them either. I don't want to get into either DLC bashing or DLC loving on this thread. A discussion on India and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is worthwhile to pursue without that type of distraction from either side, which is why I said I regretted the initial framing of this thread. Oh well, maybe we can return to a discussion of the issue at hand.

[wyldwolf]

9. Tom, I appreciate your diplomacy

..however, part of the rift between some on the left and the DLC is caused by misunderstandings.

Texaskat said he/she was surprised and pleased that the DLC seems to finally recognize that no Democratic organization can ignore National Security and foreign policy. However, the DLC is all about National Security and foreign policy. So I don't understand the reply. Does he/she believe the DLC has ignored National Security and foreign policy?

[Donna Zen]

5. Wes Clark has often spoken about creating economic alliances

with India, especially to balance the economic clout of China. Let's see. You deny that Hillary is like Brownback just because they sometimes work together. I agree. And now this incomprehensible snark of equating Clark with pro-the-long war Marshall because they agree on an economic issue.


Of course this is not about explaining the weak lobby driven policies of the DLC, this is your attempt to sully General Clark's name. You know, the man who told them not to vote for this sinful war.

These daily rants: what are they serving? You like the DLC's style of governing, I don't. I like people who know what they believe and stand up and say it. I also don't believe that anyone who put their political egos before the good of their country regarding the matter of war, should ever be in the oval office. Country trumps politics every time.

That is why I support Wes Clark not Will Marshall and the DLC oopers.

[wyldwolf]

6. TA DA!

:)

[Texas_Kat]

7. The DLC should stay out of electoral politics altogether.

I don't have any problem with the DLC promoting issues. I have a problem with them interfering in electoral politics.

They might actually be a 'value add' organization if they stuck to policy.

That said, this article is valuable regardless of whether it's published in Blueprint, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal or Cosmopolitan.