This week John Edwards made some news saying that the war on terrorism was a “bumper sticker” for the Bush administration. During the first Democratic Debate Edwards was one of a handful of candidates who said he did not believe there was a “Global War on Terrorism” as the Bush administration asserted.

See the prepared remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations on 5/23/07 which included:

The core of this presidency has been a political doctrine that George Bush calls the “Global War on Terror.” He has used this doctrine like a sledgehammer to justify the worst abuses and biggest mistakes of his administration, from Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, to the war in Iraq. The worst thing about the Global War on Terror approach is that it has backfired—our military has been strained to the breaking point and the threat from terrorism has grown.

We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq American military that is mission-focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological pursuits. We need to recognize that we have far more powerful weapons available to us than just bombs, and we need to bring them to bear. We need to reengage the world with the full weight of our moral leadership.

What we need is not more slogans but a comprehensive strategy to deal with the complex challenge of both delivering justice and being just. Not hard power. Not soft power. Smart power.

Edwards “smart power plan” includes the following from his speech.

1) The belief that any funding of the War through the end of the fiscal year is capitulating to the Bush administration. He believes Congress should send the same bill calling for the end of the war to the president without change.

2) When we “pull out” of Iraq we will need to keep troops (a smaller number) inside the green zone to protect our embassy. In addition we will need forces in Kuwait “and in the Persian Gulf” as a reactionary force.

3) We must deal instead with North Korea, China, Afghanistan, Darfur etc. Edwards doesn’t have a plan now on what we should do or how we should do it, those will come later he says, but he did have a lecture on “power” which has to do with prestige.

4) His premise is that military solutions aren’t the only solutions. He reasons Bush’s “war on terrorism” has made us less safe.

5) He doesn’t believe it is a “war” that is going on. As such his counter plan to Bush’s “war” strategy to combating terrorism includes:

- Spending $5 Billion dollars more in foreign aid primarily to “educate” the world and creating a cabinet level post to accomplish the task.
- Gathering more intelligence.
- He would “close Guantanamo Bay, restore habeas corpus, and ban torture”.
- Rebuild the military by rooting out cronyism & waste, strengthening our role in rebuilding failed nations, focus on diplomacy and only use force in extreme measures.
- Return the structure of the military to one where “military professionals will have primary responsibility in matters of tactics and operations, while civilian leadership will have authority in all matters of broad strategy and political decisions”.
- Double the recruiting budget.
- “direct my Secretary of Defense to overhaul the rules governing privatization, to punish mismanagement, and to reform DOD bonus policies to reward performance.”
- Modernize.
- Address global poverty.

Today the president said the belief that this is not a “war” on terrorism was “naive”.

Meanwhile the following video of Edwards back in 2001 pledging Democrats would remain United with the President “throughout this war on terrorism” started making the rounds.

As Raw Story pointed out Edwards own campaign Web site said the following up until very recently:

Edwards’ site said he believed “winning the war on terror requires wisdom and moral strength, as well as military might,”

So there are two elements happening here. First Edwards is definitely proposing a new vision of the world. One that denies a Global War and which looks at military might as being as much about nation building and education as bombs. It is interesting, obviously newsworthy and will give him credentials with the far left wing of the party. (Though there are still strains of similarity at the root of this between the presidents vision and his own)

With that said because so much attention has been paid on Election Geek along with other sites about the “flip-flopping” of some Republican candidates I have to point out what an amazing turn of world view this is for Edwards who has been caught changing his viewpoints about gays, deficits and his war vote recently. For a man who co-sponsored the Iraq War Authorization bill, who repeatedly went out supporting the idea of a “war on terrorism” and who was adamant about using military force, this is definitely suspect.

Change of hearts are always good but during elections they are wide open to interpretation and speculation. I also think to make this statement in a week when terrorism has begun ripping Lebanon apart, threatening the peace in Gaza & killing American soldiers in Iraq, it is a tuff sell to moderate voters to say “this doesn’t exist out there”.

I am interested to see more specifics on his plan, especially when it comes to dealing with nations like North Korea & China.