India-US News and Discussion

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 11 Feb 2010 22:35

Varoon ji,

Can you please use the quote feature when responding to other's posts? It makes reading the original post and response easier. Thanks.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Feb 2010 03:47

Bill Clinton in N.Y. hospital for heart problem

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 12 Feb 2010 08:37

Gurmeet Kanwal

http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/USArmsS ... wal_110210

US Arms Sales are propping up Pakistan as a Regional Challenger

The American ambassador in Islamabad has said that the US Defence Department is considering the sale of 12 unarmed drones to Pakistan to encourage it to cooperate in the war on terror. It is not beyond Pakistan’s technological capability to arm these UAVs with air-to-ground missiles for use in conventional conflict.

India is justified in seeing the move to go ahead with the sale of the F-16s as an US attempt to balance its strategic partnership with India by once again propping up Pakistan as a regional challenger.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Feb 2010 15:20

...amd what India should do in protest.This is what China does when the US sells arms to Taiwan.It allows the carrier visit because it wants to steal as much carrier tech and info for its own ambitious future carrier programme,but snubs the US by buying elsewhere abnd curtailing defence ties.

If the US sells Pak drone tech,we should remember gen.MUsharrat's words how Pak misuses all US military aid recd. for use against India and likethe Chinese stop all purchases of US defence eqpt. and buy from the Russians,Europeans,anywhere elsewhere,but from the US.Similarly all port visits by US warships and subs should be stopped and all Indo-US military exercises stopped indefinitely,until the US assures us that no lethalmajor arms will be sold to Pak.

Thttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_1_57/ai_113755343/aiwan.

On Arms Sales to Taiwan, China Sends Mixed Signals

February 11, 2010
HONG KONG — China sent contradictory signals on Thursday about its policies toward the United States two weeks after the Obama administration enraged the Chinese by approving the sale of $6.4 billion worth of arms to Taiwan.

Immediately after the approval was announced, the Chinese Foreign Ministry threatened to halt some military exchanges with the United States and said it would take unspecified steps to punish American companies that produced the weapons.

But on Thursday, China signaled some willingness to cooperate militarily, with an American official’s saying that China would allow an American aircraft carrier to visit Hong Kong soon. But at the same time, Air China, the country’s flagship airline, said it would buy 20 jets from the European consortium Airbus, rather than from Boeing, one of the manufacturers of arms for Taiwan.

Matthew Dolbow, the spokesman for the United States Consulate General in Hong Kong, said Thursday that China had given clearance for the carrier Nimitz to visit here “in the near future.” There was no immediate comment from the Chinese government. Prominent residents of Hong Kong have received invitations to a reception next Wednesday evening aboard the Nimitz.

China has a history of blocking port calls by American naval vessels when it is unhappy with Washington. Beijing officials even blocked two American minesweepers from seeking shelter in Hong Kong’s harbor during a storm in November 2007. American naval officers were upset at the time, calling it a violation of an international naval tradition of offering safe havens during harsh weather.

Air China did not mention the Taiwan deal when it announced that it was buying the 20 A320 jets from Airbus. But the airline had expressed support last week for the government’s policy of snubbing companies that supplied arms to Taiwan, in comments seen as a warning to Boeing.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 12 Feb 2010 18:43

As Obama bets on Asia, regional players hedge

These are clear signs of Indian hedging: seeking allies for worst-case scenarios while accommodating China on economic matters. The Obama administration's failure to reaffirm clearly that India's rise is in U.S. strategic interests has contributed to this hedging. That is a mistake the president should quickly correct, in the interests of his own vision of a new world order centered on the Pacific and Indian oceans.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 12 Feb 2010 21:20

http://bj.panda.name/

"The G-2 carries the implication that the United States would leave Asia to China to run," says B.J. Panda, a rising young political star here. Adds another Indian strategist: "We have to balance the Chinese, irrespective of what the U.S. and others do."

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Feb 2010 00:05

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y996e5MTxww
American ice dancers skating to Indian Bollywood songs

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 13 Feb 2010 22:08

One person killed in Huntsville incident is Gopi Podila:, an Indian American biologist and faculty member at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was one of three faculty members killed in a shooting at the university on February 12, 2010
Sory: Teacher held in deadly campus shootings

Also from Indian-American Professor Among 3 Killed

An Indian professor was among three faculty members killed in a shooting at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) on Friday. Three other employees were wounded in the incident – two of them are said to be in critical condition.
An assistant professor of Biology, Amy Bishop, was in custody for the shooting incident on Friday. A Harvard-trained biologist, she was considered a “research star” in the department.
The UAH spokesman identified the dead Indian-American professor as Gopi K. Podila, chairman of the biological sciences department; Maria Davis, associate professor of biology; and Adriel Johnson, associate professor of biology were the other two killed by the disgruntled professor Amy.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 14 Feb 2010 03:20

Obama names Rashad Hussain envoy to Islamic states
He is an Indian American.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 14 Feb 2010 06:59

^^^IIRC He was appointed as Counsel (deputy associate) to Obama las year

Also in the news, the shooter o Prof Gopi Podila also shot and killed her Brother in the past.
US professor also fatally shot her brother

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Feb 2010 15:57

A rant from a Lankan who has some pertinent views upon the island's geo-strategic situ,US undermining it vis-avis the LTTE.It sounds all too familar with India having to deal with the TSP and Paki terror,which the US aids and abets through arms and moolah to Pak.

http://www.island.lk/2010/02/14/features1.html

The American Karanang

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Feb 2010 00:36

Probably belongs to a grand strategy thread.
If you could see America through China's eyes

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 15 Feb 2010 04:12

Under Obama, more targeted killings than captures in counterterrorism efforts

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2010 13:12

From the other threads,TSP and Pune blast,it appears that the price for cooperation in Af-Pak that Pak is demanding and the US accepting is the "neutralisation" of India as a military threat to Pak.This is easily understood if we look at events.

1.Continued US military supplies to Pak,which affect India directly like the 7 upgraded LRMP P-3 Orions armed with anti-ship harpoon missiles too.Extra F-16s,AMRAAMs,etc.Drones and drone tech.

2.Pressure upon India to buy US military eqpt. and sign military agreements that induct India into a US network of allies including Pak.This way,India will be liable to US sanctions if it takes any military action against Pak.

3.US-India N-deal with riders that make it v.diificult for India to test further without new sanctions that would cripple our civilian N-industry after buying US plants and eqpt.

4.Total Pak inaction in prosecuting the perpetrators of 26/11 and other well known terrorist leaders who openly carry out public meetings threatening India with terror without any action from the Paki side or even criticism from the US.Compare this with the US-Pak cooperation in eliminating anti-US Taliban leadership in Pak.

5.The US preventing India from playing any meaningful role in Afghanistan,despite Indian infrastruture assistance being the most visible and successful assisatnce from abroad to the Afghan govt.India was deliberately kept out of key involvement at the Afghan conference by the US.Instead of India,the US bringing in the Saudis of all people as Afghan interlocutors to "talk" to the Taliban,their diabolic creature brought into being by Pak,the Saudis and the US.

5.Hints from informed sources that a secret N-deal for Pak is being worked out as an "equaliser" against India for the "responsible" nuclear capable ally called Pak,which is demanding a similar deal as was struck with India as the price to pay for it in curbing anti-US entities.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2010 14:20

Farah Pandith is here:

http://photos.state.gov/galleries/5/amb ... 10/15.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farah_Pandith

Farah Pandith received her Master's in Law & Diplomacy (M.A.L.D.) in 1995 from The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.[1][9] Her areas of concentration were International Security Studies, Islamic Civilizations & Southwest Asia, and International Negotiation & Conflict Resolution.[1][9] She wrote her Master's thesis on the insurgency in Kashmir, India.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 16 Feb 2010 14:27

abhishek_sharma wrote:Farah Pandith is here:

http://photos.state.gov/galleries/5/amb ... 10/15.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farah_Pandith

Farah Pandith received her Master's in Law & Diplomacy (M.A.L.D.) in 1995 from The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.[1][9] Her areas of concentration were International Security Studies, Islamic Civilizations & Southwest Asia, and International Negotiation & Conflict Resolution.[1][9] She wrote her Master's thesis on the insurgency in Kashmir, India.

Farah calls herself an Indian, from what I have read.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 16 Feb 2010 19:04

Farah calls herself an Indian, from what I have read.

Do you know of anyone in the west who calls themselves pakistani? Heck, even Sri Hussein Haqqani, TSPian amby to unkil, maintained ambiguity before his miracle appointment.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2010 19:17

I was just reliably told that Om-Baba carries a little Hanuman in his pocket.Has anyone else heard of this?There is also someone (a friend) who supposedly regularly carries out special poojas for him.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 16 Feb 2010 19:39

Hari Seldon wrote:
Farah calls herself an Indian, from what I have read.
Do you know of anyone in the west who calls themselves pakistani? Heck, even Sri Hussein Haqqani, TSPian amby to unkil, maintained ambiguity before his miracle appointment.

Meaning she is not a Basharat Peer style obnoxious character, who specifically does not call himself Indian.

bahdada · Post by **bahdada** » 16 Feb 2010 19:59

Philip wrote:I was just reliably told that Om-Baba carries a little Hanuman in his pocket.Has anyone else heard of this?There is also someone (a friend) who supposedly regularly carries out special poojas for him.

Caption from Time: Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny Madonna and child.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 16 Feb 2010 21:28

bahdada wrote: I was just reliably told that Om-Baba carries a little Hanuman in his pocket.Has anyone else heard of this?There is also someone (a friend) who supposedly regularly carries out special poojas for him.
Caption from Time: Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny Madonna and child.

This is globalization - American style

sourab_c · Post by **sourab_c** » 16 Feb 2010 21:32

Philip wrote:From the other threads,TSP and Pune blast,it appears that the price for cooperation in Af-Pak that Pak is demanding and the US accepting is the "neutralisation" of India as a military threat to Pak.

Not neutralisation of India but it has accepted a neutral position wrt both Pakistan and India. This is something that us and GOI has failed to acknowledge. In the past decade, what we have done is simply neutralised the US "threat" and nothing more. This was done through a combination of diplmocay, arms deals and the nuclear deal. IMO, this in itself is a great achievement. But, we should not assume that the US has now drifted away from Pakistan in favor of India (it seems that way due to all the Pakistani whining), but it is not true.

Pakistan still enjoys a healthy diplomatic relationship with US as it did 30 years ago. India, therefore should not entirely base its policies on what US wants or does. This would be a very dangerous move.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 16 Feb 2010 21:34

bahdada wrote:Caption from Time: Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny Madonna and child.

I wonder if Obama's Hanuman is related to his Indonesian roots. Hanuman and other Ramayan figures are revered there, and images/icons of them carried as talismans even by its Muslim citizens (or at least, this was so until the wave of Saudi-funded Islamization swept the islands over the last decade).

By the way don't you love the "tiny monkey god" description? I wonder if the oh-so-politically-correct Time magazine would also describe a Crucifix as a "little dead Israeli nailed to a scaffolding".

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 16 Feb 2010 21:46

Rudradev wrote:
bahdada wrote:Caption from Time: Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny Madonna and child.
I wonder if Obama's Hanuman is related to his Indonesian roots. Hanuman and other Ramayan figures are revered there, and images/icons of them carried as talismans even by its Muslim citizens (or at least, this was so until the wave of Saudi-funded Islamization swept the islands over the last decade).

By the way don't you love the "tiny monkey god" description? I wonder if the oh-so-politically-correct Time magazine would also describe a Crucifix as a "little dead Israeli nailed to a scaffolding".

IMVHO the PC Caption from Time should be : Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny unmarried mother and her child.
Just wondering if Hanuman (as a Name and Noun) is replaced by his description then should Maddona (as a Name and Noun) not be replaced by her description in the name of being PC and secular.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 16 Feb 2010 22:21

unmarried mother and her child.

Actually unknown (in the biblical sense not unmarried).

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 16 Feb 2010 22:27

I was just watching a ZEE News show. The anchor was pointing out that all our troubles might seem to emanate from across the border, but the hidden hand is someone else's. They had the whitehouse in the background, while the anchor was mentioning the invisible hand.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 16 Feb 2010 23:18

Behind Obama's Meeting With the Dalai Lama, Valerie Jarrett's Trip to India

President Obama's Thursday meeting with the Dalai Lama at the White House was announced just last week, but has been in the works for months. The groundwork was laid last September, when the president quietly dispatched White House Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett to Dharamsala, India, to personally deliver the invitation.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 16 Feb 2010 23:34

Just a related side-track: How many Hindus do really identify our "Dieties" as "Idols"? How may Hindus really know the semantics of "Dieties" (reverance) vs. "Idols" (object)? This realization and change has to come within - Until and unless Hindus refer our Dieties as not Idols, Hanumans will continue to be Monkey god to the world. The reverence will just not be there.

"Holy Quran", "PBUH"", "The Pope" are actually intended to seed and program the expectation of reverance from the listener/reader (IOW you are expected to approach the subjects Quran, Mohammed etc. with reverance and not a casual reference).

BijuShet wrote: IMVHO the PC Caption from Time should be : Amongst the things that Barack Obama carries for good luck are a bracelet belonging to a soldier deployed in Iraq, a gambler’s lucky chit, a tiny monkey god and a tiny unmarried mother and her child.
Just wondering if Hanuman (as a Name and Noun) is replaced by his description then should Maddona (as a Name and Noun) not be replaced by her description in the name of being PC and secular.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 16 Feb 2010 23:43

krithivas wrote:Just a related side-track: How many Hindus do really identify our "Dieties" as "Idols"? How may Hindus really know the semantics of "Dieties" (reverance) vs. "Idols" (object)? This realization and change has to come within - Until and unless Hindus refer our Dieties as not Idols, Hanumans will continue to be Monkey god to the world. The reverence will just not be there.

These are all English words and do not represent the real Indic word "Devas". There is no close word in English.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Feb 2010 00:31

Acharya wrote:These are all English words and do not represent the real Indic word "Devas". There is no close word in English.

Very well said. Getting into the nuances between deity and idol is like agreeing to play according to "their" rules which will lead onlee to defeat. Casting ourselves in their image is not the right way to go about things. We should be able to ask "So what if we pray to xyz or abc?"

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 17 Feb 2010 00:39

Deva and divinity are etymologically related from 'the shining ones'.

When pagans apply terms such as intolerant, iconoclastic, murderous, bigoted, simple-minded, god-programed violence, despoilers of civilisation, the looters, to the militant monotheisms the respect will be forth coming.

Until then, relax why expect anything better. (And I ain't even religious-it is a matter of principle).

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 17 Feb 2010 07:54

Probably can go in other thread - some what related -
Building U.S. nuclear reactors in nearly three decades....
Obama pledges $8 billion for new nuclear reactors

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 17 Feb 2010 09:21

^^^This is a good thing and hopefully companies like Westinghouse and GE can be competitive with France, Russia, South Korea and Japan in bidding for nuclear power plants in India. The more players there are, the lower the cost. Hopefully, the US can get its act together and build operational plants in 5-7 years, which is how long it takes India.

negi · Post by **negi** » 17 Feb 2010 09:51

Mort ji I wonder if costs will go down as Ru, French and Unkil had been already allotted their sites , I guess given the energy crunch there is only so much that GOI could muster when it comes to getting a decent bargain . Its too early to talk about role of domestic industrial sector but I wonder if we are geared up to supply stuff to huge projects in above league and that too from 3 different suppliers . From the looks of it poor RU has got a raw deal as they have been allotted a site in WB

, didi seems to be all set to return the Gorshkov favor .

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 18 Feb 2010 05:01

Obama to visit India in spring or summer

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... a/86081/on

US President Barack Obama is expected to visit India in spring or summer, American Ambassador to India Timothy J Roemer said here today.

"We are hopeful that the president will be coming to this great country sometime in spring or summer and seeing first hand all the opportunities here and meeting the people here...," he told reporters.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 19 Feb 2010 09:27

Replace Rahm

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... lace-rahm/

President Obama desperately needs a sweeping staff shakeup to save his presidency. Leslie H. Gelb on why he must reassign Rahm, dump Larry Summers, and get rid of National Security adviser Jim Jones.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 19 Feb 2010 09:37

^ From the article posted above:

Obama is forever taking strong stances only to backfill and trim. Most recently, he said he did not “begrudge” Wall Streeters their big earnings because that was part of the market system. This, in the face of his saying only a couple of weeks ago that such big bonuses were “shameful.”

Obama doesn’t know what’s really going on. Regarding the Middle East, he recently said that “I think it is absolutely true that what we did this year didn't produce the kind of breakthrough that we wanted, and if we had anticipated some of these political problems on both sides earlier, we might not have raised expectations as high.” He had to be totally out of it not to realize that the Palestinians and Israelis were nowhere close to sitting down with each other and dealing.

Replace Lawrence Summers, director of the White House's National Economic Council, with Paul Volcker, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve. Summers is brilliant and highly controversial; he’s been beaten up and is said to want out anyway. Volcker has unmatched stature, practical experience, and the courage of a lion.

Last but not least, James Jones, the National Security Adviser, has to move on. The career Marine was greatly admired and respected as Commandant of the Corps and as NATO’s military chief. He handled those duties with great skill. But by wide acclamation inside and outside the White House, he has not emerged as a strategist—perhaps the key requirement of this key position. The person in that job has to pull everything together—laying out achievable objectives and precise plans to dispense carefully packaged carrots and sticks. One Democrat who could step in now, despite his age, is Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national-security adviser. He has a first-rate strategic mind—a rare quality—and knows how to deliver results. Obama will need to iron out Zbig’s lack of sympathy toward Israel and Russia.

Also available are a boatload of first-class retired diplomats with the judgment and background needed to perform the National Security Council job effectively. They would be greeted with applause both at home and abroad. Try former ambassadors Thomas Pickering, Morton Abramowitz, Frank Wisner, Reginald Bartholomew, and Winston Lord. They have it all. At a minimum, they and others like them should form the core of a group that meets regularly with Obama on strategy.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Feb 2010 14:04

Yep,the tiny "monkey god" is what he supposedly picked up in Indonesia and there is a dude in our land who does his poojas on a regular basis,what I've been reliably told.I suppose Om-Baba's visit in the Spring will also coincide with a few military and nuclear deals being wrapped up and it explains why there is indecent haste in the "talks" with Pak.Pak has been promised Indian neuter-ality on Afghanistan and on the border,while the US will pump up the Paki militayr with new toys and pocket money.The master-pupetteer is Uncle Sam and our very own good peddlar of snake-oil is doing his bit to "grease" the Indian machine to fulfil Uncle Sam's plans!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 20 Feb 2010 03:30

Shyam Saran’s exit suggests changed policy climate

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ ... 109811.ece

The Special Envoy of the Prime Minister on Climate Change “has been permitted to demit office from Friday, March 14”, a terse announcement from the PMO said.

Last year, the tussle between Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh and the SEPM virtually spilled out into the open with the leak of a letter written by Mr. Saran to the Prime Minister listing his misgivings about the direction the Minister seemed to be heading in. And he was not alone. C. Dasgupta and Prodipto Ghosh -- retired officials who have specialised on the subject and who were part of the Indian negotiating team – also questioned the wisdom of some of Mr. Ramesh’s pronouncements, especially on accepting international monitoring and diluting the per capita norm. They only agreed to go to Copenhagen after the Minister reassured them there would be no dilution in India’s stand.

One of those who wrote to Dr. Singh asking that Mr. Ramesh be given full charge was N.K. Singh, the Rajya Sabha M.P. Mr. Singh’s letter appreciated Mr. Saran’s negotiating skills but said the absence of symmetry was leading to confusion.

Whatever the trigger, Mr. Saran is the second high-profile climate negotiator to exit the stage after crossing swords with the United States. Last December, the Philippines government sacked its chief negotiator, Bernaditas Castro-Muller, in the run-up to the Copenhagen summit, a move civil society groups said was taken to please Washington.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Feb 2010 07:35

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... r_syndrome

The Carter Syndrome
Barack Obama might yet revolutionize America's foreign policy. But if he can't reconcile his inner Thomas Jefferson with his inner Woodrow Wilson, the 44th president could end up like No. 39.

BY WALTER RUSSELL MEAD | JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2010

Neither a cold-blooded realist nor a bleeding-heart idealist, Barack Obama has a split personality when it comes to foreign policy. So do most U.S. presidents, of course, and the ideas that inspire this one have a long history at the core of the American political tradition. In the past, such ideas have served the country well. But the conflicting impulses influencing how this young leader thinks about the world threaten to tear his presidency apart -- and, in the worst scenario, turn him into a new Jimmy Carter.

Obama's long deliberation over the war in Afghanistan is a case study in presidential schizophrenia: After 94 days of internal discussion and debate, he ended up splitting the difference -- rushing in more troops as his generals wanted, while calling for their departure to begin in July 2011 as his liberal base demanded. It was a sober compromise that suggests a man struggling to reconcile his worldview with the weight of inherited problems. Like many of his predecessors, Obama is not only buffeted by strong political headwinds, but also pulled in opposing directions by two of the major schools of thought that have guided American foreign-policy debates since colonial times.

All the Presidents' Men
Politicians and public intellectuals have been influenced by former U.S. presidents, be it Jefferson, Hamilton, Wilson, or Jackson.
In general, U.S. presidents see the world through the eyes of four giants: Alexander Hamilton, Woodrow Wilson, Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson. Hamiltonians share the first Treasury secretary's belief that a strong national government and a strong military should pursue a realist global policy and that the government can and should promote economic development and the interests of American business at home and abroad. Wilsonians agree with Hamiltonians on the need for a global foreign policy, but see the promotion of democracy and human rights as the core elements of American grand strategy. Jeffersonians dissent from this globalist consensus; they want the United States to minimize its commitments and, as much as possible, dismantle the national-security state. Jacksonians are today's Fox News watchers. They are populists suspicious of Hamiltonian business links, Wilsonian do-gooding, and Jeffersonian weakness.

Moderate Republicans tend to be Hamiltonians. Move right toward the Sarah Palin range of the party and the Jacksonian influence grows. Centrist Democrats tend to be interventionist-minded Wilsonians, while on the left and the dovish side they are increasingly Jeffersonian, more interested in improving American democracy at home than exporting it abroad.

Some presidents build coalitions; others stay close to one favorite school. As the Cold War ended, George H.W. Bush's administration steered a largely Hamiltonian course, and many of those Hamiltonians later dissented from his son's war in Iraq. Bill Clinton's administration in the 1990s mixed Hamiltonian and Wilsonian tendencies. This dichotomy resulted in bitter administration infighting when those ideologies came into conflict -- over humanitarian interventions in the Balkans and Rwanda, for example, and again over the relative weight to be given to human rights and trade in U.S. relations with China.

More recently, George W. Bush's presidency was defined by an effort to bring Jacksonians and Wilsonians into a coalition; the political failure of Bush's ambitious approach created the context that made the Obama presidency possible.
Walter Russell Mead is Henry A. Kissinger senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World. He blogs at The American Interest