Alan Khazei�s Approach to Big Citizenship: A Blueprint for American Policy

Click here to download Alan's full policy in PDF format.

Foreign Policy

Through his career as a social entrepreneur, Alan has traveled to more than 30 countries to meet with leaders in government, business, and the social sector. His work has taken him to all corners of the globe, including China, India, Russia, Eastern Europe, Northern Ireland, Israel, and South Africa. He understands the importance of a global perspective in addressing the issues that the citizens of Massachusetts care about.

Alan has a unique approach to making change happen. With a proven track record of organizing movements on behalf of change, he knows how to mobilize key players at the grassroots and in the legislature. He has built diverse coalitions that have successfully worked to establish Americorps and keep it funded, and to achieve the largest expansion of national service since the New Deal through the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act. Alan will apply this same general strategy to foreign policy and international diplomacy. By bringing key players to the table, connecting stakeholders with shared values, and mobilizing stakeholders with a common agenda, we can enact policies that serve the people rather than lobbyists or PACs. This has been his approach to government for more than 20 years, and it is a role he will continue to play as Senator.

Guiding Principles

•   The global issues we confront—climate change, clean energy, nuclear proliferation, the scarcity of basic resources, extreme poverty, failing states, pandemics, terrorism—are deeply interrelated. They cannot be solved by military means alone, nor by unilateralism. We need tighter collaboration among all cabinet departments, as well as with our allies. The United States must adopt a new Grand Strategy that emphasizes the importance of using all aspects of national power—whether political, economic, military, or cultural—to meet our global objectives.

•   The world has been—and will continue to be—inspired by American ideals. Each citizen is an ambassador who can transmit those ideals to the rest of the world, as well as bring a global perspective back home with them.

•   The international institutions that guide our global system—the United Nations, the World Bank, and others—date from the period immediately following World War II. We need to reform them by introducing a culture of entrepreneurial, innovative thinking that allows us to better respond to the challenges and opportunities we face today.

•   We must use diplomacy—ranging from negotiation, interstate collaboration, and the threat of severe sanctions—as the principal tool of our foreign policy.

•   We must embrace the ideal of a world without nuclear weapons and develop a system to monitor and stop all other entities from acquiring them.

•   The United States must work to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons, which would trigger a dangerous arms race in the Middle East and pose a grave threat to global security.

Positions

Afghanistan

I have spent my life in civilian service, but have not been in the military. I have many friends, however, who have put their lives on the line for our country. The most sacred decision an elected official can make is to put our troops in harm’s way. I was the only candidate to discuss Afghanistan in my announcement speech, because it is such an urgent issue.

I do not support an increase in troops in Afghanistan. We need to adopt a comprehensive foreign policy strategy, not just a military strategy. I am not surprised that Gen. McChrystal wants more troops because our people are dying at the highest monthly rates since the war started, but I believe that there are other steps we should take. We must better clarify our mission, set concrete goals and objectives, be honest about the costs in American lives and treasure, implement a time line, and develop an exit strategy. Most of all, we have to convince the American people to support our policy going forward. History has shown that if the American people do not support our involvement in foreign conflicts, they are not sustainable. Finally, we need a greater focus on aid and development. We must continue our engagement in Afghanistan with a comprehensive, smart power strategy that engages all aspects of our national capabilities, not just the resources of the Department of Defense.

The choices we face in Afghanistan today are reminiscent of the choices President Kennedy faced during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Both options would have likely led to nuclear war. The President’s advisors presented him with two options: either bomb the country or invade it. Kennedy asked for alternatives, and eventually pursued a naval blockade with intensive shuttle diplomacy to give the USSR a face-saving way out of the crisis.

We need the same sense of urgency and entrepreneurial, creative thinking in Afghanistan and Pakistan to prevent either country from becoming a haven for terrorists. Yet we do not yet have a reasonable partner in the Afghan government, which has proven to be corrupt. Only when Afghanistan elects a legitimate, credible government can we consider devoting additional resources to that country. We must also recognize that in Pakistan—where Al Qaeda has a strong presence—the level of violence is rising, and the government possesses nuclear weapons. In spite of this situation, we are spending only a fraction in Pakistan of what we are spending in Afghanistan. Our mission will not succeed unless we have a clear objective matched by sufficient resources.

An essential aspect of a smart power strategy is regional diplomacy. The U.S. can’t solve entrenched challenges alone, but must look to engage neighbors and allies in a collective effort. Without this coordination, our actions will ultimately be ineffective. I have always looked towards coalitions to solve the pressing challenges we have here at home, and it is an approach that I will continue as Senator.

Iraq

I strongly opposed the Iraq War and the Bush administration’s doctrine of “preventive war.” The Iraq War has been a disaster and, along with the preventive war policy, led to an all-time low in relations between the U.S. and much of the rest of the world. Fortunately, President Obama has already done much to restore our standing in the eyes of the world’s people.

I support the process to remove all U.S. combat troops from Iraq, and I believe it should be finished as quickly as possible in a way that minimizes danger and disruption. President Obama has committed to this objective, and as a Senator I would encourage and strongly support the withdrawal. The U.S. military should invest resources into ensuring that the Iraqis can effectively manage the security environment in their own country. At the same time, we will need to leave behind for a period of time a contingent of U.S. troops—between 5,000 and 20,000—to perform essential, non-combat functions. Such activities include protecting the U.S. embassy and training Iraqi security personnel.

Nuclear Weapons Proliferation

Historically, several countries—such as Libya—have been persuaded to abandon their nuclear program. Such persuasion has been possible by strategic diplomatic engagement that combines the joint application of sanctions with a face-saving way forward that preserves the countries interests in security, prestige, and goals for regional influence. I would thus support a strategy of sanctions against Tehran if the country does not restrain its nuclear program. Sanctions might include restricting travel, restricting international banking, limiting foreign investments, or cutting off gas supplies. In exchange for abandoning its nuclear program, Iran might then be enticed by its inclusion in regional security talks, guarantees of a secure supply of reactor fuel for purely civilian purposes, and a clear path forward toward normalized relationships with the West.

I strongly support the vision of moving toward a world free of nuclear weapons. I was proud and honored to be a founding signatory of the “Global Zero” compact to eliminate nuclear weapons from the beginning of their effort. As a Senator, I would make this issue a top priority and work to galvanize a citizen movement to accomplish this goal, as well as calling for multilateral negotiations, including with Russia, for deep reductions in our nuclear arsenals.

It is unacceptable that the United States has waited so long to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and I believe its ratification should be a top priority for the administration and the Senate. As a Senator, I would work to motivate citizens to support and advance the treaty.

I am strongly opposed to building new nuclear weapons systems. Instead, to assure our national security, I strongly support efforts like the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, initiated by Senators Nunn and Lugar, to greatly reduce the dangers posed by nuclear stockpiles and other materials in Russia and the former Soviet states. Unless we fully fund the programs and work to control nuclear material, it is virtually inevitable that terrorists eventually will gain access to a nuclear weapon. This is the single greatest security threat we face, and as a Senator I would push the appropriations process to ensure these critical programs are sufficiently funded. This is the most cost-effective way to protect our security.

I will use my proven record of bringing people together—at the grassroots and in the legislature—to help solve the nuclear proliferation challenge. We must convene leaders at summits and at negotiating tables to eliminate nuclear weapons from their arsenals, institute treaties for the permanent elimination of such weapons, and improve structures that monitor attempted nuclear proliferation among governments and non-governmental entities. I will build on the grassroots organizing method that successfully restored funding for AmeriCorps to fuel a broad-based coalition of organizations and citizens who embrace the movement to eliminate nuclear weapons from all countries’ defense arsenals.