Kerry-free Security Posture could be a step back for Party image

[Sensitivity]

Democratic gains in public support for the party’s leadership on national security issues can be traced to two factors: (1) The strong national security image of Kerry and his team in the 2004 campaign, even as they challenged a wartime “commander in chief;” (2) the unraveling of the Bush’s Iraq war policy.

Today’s unveiling of the Party’s nationals security platform by Harry Reid surrounded by a hodge-podge of political personalities, rather than Kerry flanked by truly credentialed leaders, could add nothing to, and may rather detract from, the Democratic security policy public image.

On the issue of national security, it is much more important to project an image of tough-minded capability than of agreeable unity.

The failure of the party to maintain some semblance of unity behind its nominated leader is now endangering the party’s 2006 chances. The logic for a mature political party would be for the last nominee of the Party to lead on key policy issues with the support of past democratic Presidents. By turning away from Gore after 2000 and then Kerry after 2004 Democrats keep destroying their ability to build a really strong opposition with an defined image of consistency and credibility to present to the nation.

The danger to the party is even more pronounced with its apparent distancing from Kerry because Kerry is the first party leader with national security credentials since John Kennedy. Before “terrorism” was a popularly discussed threat, John Kerry had addressed the urgent need for a realignment of U.S. military and intelligence posture in his book, “The New War (1997).” Kerry brought to the center of the leadership insights from his 3 terms on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a decade as Chairman or Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations.

For most of the Clinton era, Kerry was the leading Senator on military issues. He was the go-to guy regarding U.S. policy in Bosnia and intervention in Kosova. Security. Did winning the presidential nomination make him now irrelevant?

The failure of the Party to put Kerry (and key members of his national security team such as Gary Hart) front and center in presenting its “Real Security” platform is not just a shame, but it is also a danger to some very difficult to achieve gains in the Party’s military and security image.