Joseph Lieberman on Foreign Policy
Democratic Jr Senator (CT), ran for V.P. with Gore, ran for president 2004
Adopt an international Marshall Plan for the Muslim world
Q: What do you think about the Iraq occupation?
A: Bush has lost the moral authority to lead an international coalition against terrorism because of his one-sided, unilateral, arrogant foreign policy. I am ready to be the president who will lead an
international coalition to adopt an international Marshall Plan for the Muslim world. We're going to win it by winning the larger war for the hearts and minds of people in the Islamic world, giving them an opportunity, helping them to live in freedom.
Source: Democratic 2004 Primary Presidential Debate in Durham NH
Dec 9, 2003
Preemptive war policy is foolish and provokes the world
The war against Saddam Hussein was right. But I never viewed it as part of Bush's preemption policy. I opposed that policy. It was foolish to declare such a policy. It outraged both our enemies and our allies around the world. A nation always preserves
the right to take preemptive action in defense of our security and our freedom. But why declare it & provoke everyone. I viewed the Iraq war as the last battle in the 1991 Gulf War. It was a battle to enforce the promises that Saddam made and never kept.
Source: Democratic Debate in Columbia SC
May 3, 2003
Tighten Cuban trade embargo but help exiles
“I will not rest until we all do what we can to achieve for the people of that great island the freedom that we treasure in the United States of America,” Lieberman said of communist Cuba. Lieberman has
the strongest record of supporting exile causes of any national candidate. The Connecticut senator consistently voted to tighten the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba, and to prevent food and medicine sales to the island.
Source: Pat Neal, CNN.com
Oct 24, 2000
US must not withdraw troops and retreat into isolationism
Lieberman said, “If Bush thinks he’s going to pull soldiers out of peacekeeping in Europe, he hasn’t learned the lessons of the two world wars and the Cold War. He will truly wound the strongest military alliance in the history of the world. He will hurt
the credibility & strength of the US around the world. He will raise questions about whether we are going back to an isolationist orientation. You’ve got to consider the extraordinary experience that Gore has had in foreign policy and military matters.”
Source: AP Story, NY Times
Oct 23, 2000
Cuba Libre, Free Cuba!
Lieberman said, “Al Gore and I believe that a free and democratic Cuba is in the interests of the United States. As long as the good Lord gives me breath, I will say, ‘Cuba Libre,’ free Cuba!”
Source: AP Story, NY Times
Oct 23, 2000
Gore will continue critical role in peace process
Q: Do you agree with US Middle East policy?
LIEBERMAN: America has a national strategic and a principled interest in peace in the Middle East. Al Gore has played a critical role in advancing that process. These peoples have come centuries forward in
the last seven years. I pray that the unrest in the last week will not make it hard for them to go back to the peace table. We’ve been on a very constructive course in the Middle East, played a unique role, and Al Gore and I will continue to do that.
CHENEY: We made significant breakthroughs at the end of the Bush administration because of the Gulf War. By virtue of the end of the Cold War, the Soviets were no longer a factor. My guess is that the next administration is going to have to come to
grips with the current state of affairs. I think it’s very important that we have a president with firm leadership who has the kind of track record of dealing straight with people, so that friends respect us and adversaries fear us.
Source: Vice-Presidential debate
Oct 5, 2000
Joseph Lieberman on China
Deal with human rights issues with carrot AND stick
American foreign policy, at its best, reflects not just our economic interest but our political values. That is why we remain focused on human rights in China. The thrust of [bills dealing with Chinese human rights issues] are almost uniformly negative.
There is no carrot. Only the stick. Americans are broadly opposed to Chinese policies that limit individual freedoms. But we have seen signs of progress in China. We must now recognize that progress and push it forward.
Source: Press Release, “Embracing Incentive”
Mar 5, 1998
Commission on human rights to monitor each Chinese province
Our Senate legislation proposes a commission to promote the rule of law, respect for individual rights, and religious tolerance, including a bilateral commission on human rights, an exchange of religious and legal professionals, and multilateral action
on human and workers’ rights, including a registry on all political prisoners.
We also propose a commission to profile China province by province, since-as we know on more everyday issues here in the US-a little interstate competition can be a healthy
catalyst for better quality, and the Chinese provinces are quite different in their governance from one another.
We envision these profiles serving as a basis for opening up investment in regions which have met basic international standards of human
rights, labor and environmental practices, which have allowed increased and secure American investments, and which protect and encourage the free flow of ideas and respect for human rights. We encourage first, and punish only when necessary.
Source: Press Release, “Embracing Incentive”
Mar 5, 1998
Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe.
H.R. 3167; Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001, To endorse the vision of further enlargement of the NATO Alliance. Vote to pass a bill that would support further expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, authorize military assistance to several eastern European countries and lift assistance restrictions on Slovakia.
; vote number 2002-116
on May 17, 2002
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion.
Adoption of the conference report on the 2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill provided $12.7 billion for foreign aid programs in 2000.
Status: Conf Rpt Agreed to Y)51; N)49
Reference: H.R. 2606 Conference Report;
Bill H.R. 2606
; vote number 1999-312
on Oct 6, 1999
Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions.
To kill a proposal limiting President Clinton's ability to impose economic sanctions on foreign nations.
Status: Motion to Table Agreed to Y)53; N)46; NV)1
Reference: Motion to table the Lugar Amdt #3156.;
Bill S. 2159
; vote number 1998-201
on Jul 15, 1998
Voted NO on limiting NATO expansion to only Poland, Hungary & Czech.
This amendment would have limited NATO Expansion to only include Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.
Status: Amdt Rejected Y)41; N)59
Reference: NATO Expansion limit-Warner Amdt. #2322;
Bill NATO Expansion Treaty #105-36
; vote number 1998-112
on Apr 30, 1998
Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF.
Would provide $17.9 billion for the International Monetary Fund.
Status: Amdt Agreed to Y)84; N)16
Reference: McConnell Amdt #2100;
Bill S. 1768
; vote number 1998-44
on Mar 26, 1998
Voted YES on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba.
Status: Conf Rpt Agreed to Y)74; N)22; NV)4
Reference: Conference Report on H.R. 927;
Bill H.R. 927
; vote number 1996-22
on Mar 5, 1996
Voted YES on ending Vietnam embargo.
Ending U.S. trade embargos on the country of Vietnam.
Status: Amdt Agreed to Y)62; N)38
Reference: For. Reltns. Auth. Act FY 94 & 95;
Bill S. 1281
; vote number 1994-5
on Jan 27, 1994
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence.
Lieberman signed the manifesto, "A New Agenda for the New Decade":
Build a Public Consensus Supporting US Global Leadership
The internationalist outlook that served America and the world so well during the second half of the 20th century is under attack from both ends of the political spectrum. As the left has gravitated toward protectionism, many on the right have reverted to “America First” isolationism.
Our leaders should articulate a progressive internationalism based on the new realities of the Information Age: globalization, democracy, American pre-eminence, and the rise of a new array of threats ranging from regional and ethnic conflicts to the spread of missiles and biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. This approach recognizes the need to revamp, while continuing to rely on, multilateral alliances that advance U.S. values and interests.
A strong, technologically superior defense is the foundation for US global leadership. Yet the US continues to employ defense strategies, military missions, and force
structures left over from the Cold War, creating a defense establishment that is ill-prepared to meet new threats to our security. The US must speed up the “revolution in military affairs” that uses our technological advantage to project force in many different contingencies involving uncertain and rapidly changing security threats -- including terrorism and information warfare.
Goals for 2010
Source: The Hyde Park Declaration 00-DLC12 on Aug 1, 2000
- A clear national policy with bipartisan support that continues US global leadership, adjusts our alliances to new regional threats to peace and security, promotes the spread of political and economic freedom, and outlines where and how we are willing to use force.
- A modernized military equipped to deal with emerging threats to security, such as terrorism, information warfare, weapons of mass destruction, and destabilizing regional conflicts.