ENERGY FOR ALL. I'm at America in the World, a joint conference by the Center for American Progress and The Century Foundation. According to my program (can't follow the action without one...), we're "forging a new vision for foreign policy and international security." I'm struck, though, by the topic of the first panel: "The Energy, The Environment, and National Security." A few years ago, everyone was complaining that Democrats needed a national security vision. They got one. But it's about global warming.
Energy security has become the unifying force in Democratic foreign policy. Doesn't matter if you're a conservationist or an interventionist or an environmentalist or a dove -- everyone agrees that we should use less foreign oil, less oil, less carbon, and do more to forestall global warming. It's popular with the voters (at least in a theoretical way -- we'll see what happens when someone tries a carbon tax), and the various elements of the strategy achieve buy-in from portions of the Democratic coalition that are generally at odds with one another. I can't quite decide if the subject is acting in a complementary way to a straight national security policy, or serving as a substitute for an issue Democrats are still uncomfortable talking about, but energy's sudden preeminence in these discussions is worth keeping an eye on.
You need to be logged in to comment.
(If there's one thing we know about comment trolls, it's that they're lazy)