Meet Martin O’Malley, Hillary Clinton’s Latest Unlikely National Security Critic.

[elleng]

The former Maryland governor offers a more wary foreign policy, contrasting himself with a more hawkish Clinton and Republican field.

If Hillary Clinton is betting that 2016 won't be a national-security election, at least for the Democratic base, Martin O'Malley is betting she's wrong—and that voters want a candidate who will be more wary about wielding U.S. military might.

"The invasion of Iraq, along with the subsequent disarming of the Iraqi army, the military, will be remembered as one of the most tragic, deceitful, and costly blunders in U.S. history," O'Malley told the Truman National Security Project's annual conference. "And we are still paying the price of a war pursued under false pretenses and acquiesced to, in the words of Dr. King, 'by the appalling silence of the good.' "

Though he never mentioned Clinton by name, it was an obvious reference to the former New York senator and others' vote for the Iraq war, and part of an attempt to distance himself from Clinton's more hawkish brand of Democratic foreign policy. "Today's challenges defy easy solutions. We may have the most sophisticated military in the world, but we don't have a silver bullet." . .

He cited the threat foremost in voters' and candidates' minds: the Islamic State. "No threat probably better illustrates the unintended consequences of a mindless rush to war and a lack of understanding than the emergence of ISIS," he said. . .

'Malley responded to Republican candidates' calls to send more U.S. troops to Iraq by noting that the use of U.S. military power could actually boost ISIS. "We must be mindful that American boots on the ground can be counterproductive to our desired outcome. We will not be successful in degrading ISIS if the number of militants taken off the battlefield is exceeded by number of new recruits replacing them," he said.

And in contrast to a Republican field whose speeches are laced with the red meat of "radical Islamic extremism"—an attempted ding at a president who they claim "won't name the enemy"—O'Malley said, "We must do more to amplify credible local voices in the region to reveal ISIS for what it is: a gang of murderous thugs who have perverted the name of one of the world's great religions."

But his clearest attempt to tie Clinton's tenure as secretary of State to what he framed as a short-sighted overeagerness to jump to military force in response to turmoil and instability abroad was in invoking Libya. "We must realize there are real lessons to be learned from the tragedies in Benghazi," he said. "Namely, we need to know, in advance, who is likely to take power or vie for it once a dictator is toppled. Not after."

Doug Wilson, formerly an assistant Defense secretary for public affairs and now O'Malley's senior foreign policy adviser—and also chair of Truman's board of advisers—insisted that the candidate's speech was not intended to indict Clinton or any other candidate, but rather to lend some insight into his national security strategy amid questions of how a former governor with little experience on the issue can serve as commander in chief at a time of global turmoil.

"There is no mention of Hillary or the Republicans," Wilson told Defense One. "People knee-jerk frame Benghazi with Hillary. And what he is saying is you've got to stop doing that. Benghazi is not Hillary 2016, Benghazi is an example of what happens when you topple dictators and do not know or understand who comes after them.

"Martin is not poll-driven," he said. "If he was, he wouldn't be in the race. He's doing this because he thinks there needs to be some different discussions going on in terms of America's role in the world. … He's not a Brookings Institute foreign policy wonk, but he's travelled, he's met foreign leaders … he's essentially putting his interest where his mouth is."

http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/meet-martin-o-malley-hillary-clinton-s-latest-unlikely-national-security-critic-20150629

[geek tragedy]

1. He didn't think it was a deal breaker when he endorsed her over Obama

in 2007-2008.

Going there with Benghazi?

[bigtree]

4. to be fair, she hadn't served as SoS yet

...and he's used Benghazi to emphasize the importance of diplomacy like that of diplomats like Chris Stevens in Libya, which isn't exactly an Obama (Clinton state Dept.) foreign policy success.

CBS:

Stevens, O'Malley said, "gave his life reaching out to those emerging from the rubble of Gadhafi's dictatorship."

O'Malley's strategy, he said, would better equip diplomats like Stevens who are working in "hostile" environments with the tools to engage with local leaders and improve American intelligence of emerging threats.

"We must recognize that there are real lessons to be learned from the tragedy in Benghazi," he said. "Namely, we need to know in advance who is likely to take power or vie for it once a dictator is toppled."

Guardian:

“Twitter and Facebook are no substitute for personal relationships and human intelligence. We must recruit and retain a new generation of talented American diplomats. And we must give them the tools to identify and engage with a new generation of leaders from different walks of life – often in hostile environments where we lack historic ties, where we lack relationships.”

If she wants to be considered capable, she should be able to defend her actual record.

[geek tragedy]

7. Libya was destined to be a failure no matter what.

Alternate scenarios were either that the French and Brits conduct all the bombings, or that Gaddafi butchered his way into holding onto power.

His Iraq comments are certainly fair. But I just don't see how he is able to make a better case on that front than Sanders does.

I hope the line about Benghazi doesn't become a featured one--serious backlash potential there. If there's a single word Democrats are tired of hearing . . .

[bigtree]

8. yeah, I'm not thrilled to go there

...with Benghazi used as a bogus wedge issue by republicans over some supposed 'lies' and cover-ups' which have been repeatedly disproved and debunked.

[geek tragedy]

9. Critiquing Libya policy is more than fair and appropriate.

Just gotta watch the B word.

[bigtree]

2. I think it's enough to just criticize the invasion and occupation

...and let Hillary Clinton explain for herself where she stands.

What I like is how he relates this to his overall approach to foreign policy - which is a reliance on more international partnerships, seeking more local responsibility for regional conflicts and threats from neighboring countries, and actually redefining what constitutes a threat to the U.S.. Also, changing the way we respond to those threats by relying more on diplomacy instead of the reflexive military responses we've been locked into for decades.

[elleng]

3. and I just added this, bigtree:

Doug Wilson, formerly an assistant Defense secretary for public affairs and now O'Malley's senior foreign policy adviser—and also chair of Truman's board of advisers—insisted that the candidate's speech was not intended to indict Clinton or any other candidate, but rather to lend some insight into his national security strategy amid questions of how a former governor with little experience on the issue can serve as commander in chief at a time of global turmoil.

"There is no mention of Hillary or the Republicans," Wilson told Defense One. "People knee-jerk frame Benghazi with Hillary. And what he is saying is you've got to stop doing that. Benghazi is not Hillary 2016, Benghazi is an example of what happens when you topple dictators and do not know or understand who comes after them.

"Martin is not poll-driven," he said. "If he was, he wouldn't be in the race. He's doing this because he thinks there needs to be some different discussions going on in terms of America's role in the world. … He's not a Brookings Institute foreign policy wonk, but he's travelled, he's met foreign leaders … he's essentially putting his interest where his mouth is."

[bigtree]

5. thanks for that, elleng

...maybe it will help keep this discussion in the policy realm, and not bog it down in some internecine campaign argument.

[elleng]

6. Hope so.

Would be nice, and USEFUL!

[geek tragedy]

10. Um, that's three uses of "Benghazi" in

four sentences uttered.

"People knee-jerk frame Benghazi with Hillary. And what he is saying is you've got to stop doing that. Benghazi is not Hillary 2016, Benghazi is an example of what happens when you topple dictators and do not know or understand who comes after them.

As a Sanders supporter, I guess I should encourage that.

[elleng]

11. if you don't want people to make their decision on the merits, maybe.

[geek tragedy]

18. Worked well for Mitt Romney.

Please proceed, Governor.

[Jefferson23]

12. So did he feel the actions taken in Libya were sound or not? It appears he is suggesting

one can proceed with regime change as long as you are certain who will be replaced.

Which is concerning as Libya was a serious mistake for many reasons, we, the United
States, France and Britain are despised beyond words in that region of the world b/c
we have fucked with these people for far too long.

[tritsofme]

13. When your campaign's position in the polls is statistically insignificant, there is no criticism

of the frontrunner that is unlikely.

[Raine1967]

14. This makes little to no sense.

Upthread — there is real discussion. This post just looks like something to de-rail that.



Anyway, I like ice cream.

[elleng]

15. So do I, Raine!

Picked up my favorite coffee Hagen Daz today!!!

[Raine1967]

16. I LOVE coffee ice cream!

and that makes sense.

[elleng]

17. Sure does!