What the candidates can learn from two former presidents about foreign policy

The conventional wisdom has long been that this year’s elections would be dominated by typical domestic issues, particularly the economy. But the atrocities carried out by Hamas against Israel on Oct. 7, the resulting war, and fear of escalation could alter the race.

More Americans now say that foreign policy should be a top priority for the U.S. government this year, the Associated Press reports. And President Biden is facing high disapproval rates for his response to events in the Middle East. A Pew survey conducted in late November and early December found that a 41 percent plurality of U.S. adults, including one-third of Democrats, disapprove of his handling of the Israel-Hamas war.

For presidents seeking a second term, foreign policy issues can be especially challenging, with shortcomings hurting the candidate but successes offering no guarantee of re-election.

President Jimmy Carter’s inability to secure the release of U.S. hostages in Iran for 444 days contributed to his resounding defeat in 1980. President George H.W. Bush steered the U.S. through a mostly peaceful end of the Cold War and a decisive victory in the Persian Gulf War, but he could not overcome a sluggish economic recovery in 1992.

In December, the FBI warned that the threat of potential terror attacks in the U.S. is “likely heightened throughout winter,” as foreign terror groups “have called for lone actor attacks in the U.S.” and extremists have “increased calls for violence and celebrated attacks on the Jewish community.”

The threat shows no sign of abating. On Wednesday, the U.S. relisted the Houthi movement in Yemen as a designated terrorist group in response to its attacks in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. So there is reason to expect that American voters will be increasingly concerned this year.

For those old enough, this threat evokes the fears and trauma that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks by al Qaeda and the wars that followed. And politically, it presents both Democrats and Republicans with a challenge and opportunity to argue that their candidates (for the presidency and Congress) will do more to fight Islamist terror.

What should voters look for? Having spent years in counterterrorism, including in clandestine operations, we see certain actions as crucial for reducing threats to the homeland. Candidates should present specific plans to address these and prevent conflicts from expanding.

For terrorist organizations around the world, the goal is to carry out attacks that will draw attention to their causes, attract recruits and showcase their capabilities. Hamas raised the stakes on Oct. 7, seizing headlines and establishing narratives through ongoing propaganda campaigns. This makes other groups want to do the same, in order to assert their relevance, as exemplified by the Houthi attacks that are damaging global supply chains and threatening to expand the ongoing conflict.

To fight this threat, the U.S. needs strong collaboration with foreign governments and security services across the globe. It takes around-the-clock rapid response work in unison to detect, disrupt and degrade threats from known terrorist groups. This coordination needs to include all levels of government inside the U.S. as well — local, state, and national.

The government must also be active in arresting terror-affiliated and suspected individuals wherever there’s legal cause. These arrests can disrupt plots and garner intelligence, making it much harder for groups to reach their local agents and coordinate attacks.

Lone actors are even more difficult to identify and disrupt, since they are often unknown to law enforcement and intelligence officials and don’t broadcast their plans. Friends and family members are more likely to notice changes in loved ones’ behavior or signs of radicalization, and to suspect that they may be plotting something.

So the government needs new public awareness campaigns to help people know what to look for, and what to do if they spot suspicious behavior. The country also needs improved relationships between security services (including police, state troopers and more) and local populations to facilitate information-sharing, akin to the post-9/11 “See something, say something” campaign.

Sustained efforts to delegitimize the ideologies of groups like Hamas are crucial as well. Government leaders need specific strategies and initiatives to counter extremist propaganda, both online and offline, and support programs that foster critical thinking and psychological resilience against indoctrination.

As Americans look at political candidates, they should consider who has clear strategies and knowledge to take on this growing challenge. The threat should not be underestimated — and the best candidates for political offices will understand that.

Tim Jones is the Donald R. Beall Defense Fellow at the Naval Postgraduate School and managing director of intelligence at Banyan Risk Group. David Dezso is founder and CEO of Banyan Risk Group.