The debate among a panel fashioning themselves as the Duke McLaughlin group Wednesday night was split along the lines of politician and the press, and academic and analyst.
University faculty members David Gergen, adviser to the past four presidents, and David Price, a longtime U.S. Representative from the fourth congressional district in N.C., maintained the Democratic party line and staunchly defended the Clinton administration. In contrast, Fred Barnes, senior editor of The New Republic, and James Adams, longtime Washington correspondent for the Sunday Times of England, were more critical of the indecisiveness and inconsistency that has marked the Clinton presidency.
Adams strongly criticized Clinton's statement that the North Koreans would not be permitted to maintain their nuclear capabilities and his later compromise with the North Korean government. In response, Gergen outlined the strengths of the agreement, saying that because the North Koreans already possessed a level of nuclear capability, a blanket prohibition would have been ineffective. Under Clinton's agreement, the North Koreans should freeze development and actively work with the United States to reduce nuclear capabilities, Gergen said.
"Will there be ambiguities? Yes. Are they worth going to war over? No," Gergen said, adding that many other countries also possess ambiguous nuclear capabilities.
The discussion, which took place at Griffith Film Theater also touched on Clinton's inability to connect with the American people. Price said that many of the perceived problems with the presidency stemmed from a lack of effective communication, and he praised presidential achievements such as NAFTA and the five-year budget plan.
Barnes, however, questioned whether media coverage and poor communication was indeed such a large contributor to Clinton's negative image.
"Every White House along the way has said at times `well, we're not getting our message out,"' he said. "But the president has the biggest microphone in the entire world."
The American people are currently looking for an activist government, Barnes said, not an interventionist government. They support Clinton's attempt to break the baseball strike, but are less supportive of his comprehensive efforts to reform health care because of the government intervention involved, he said.
In contrast, Gergen saw American voters as a dissatisfied group looking for a new political leader to help them improve their situation. Citing the approval ratings of Bush, Perot, Clinton and Gingrich, Gergen said the Republican landslide victory in November was not due so much to the politics involved as to voters' desire for change.
"People feel trapped economically and they are starting to look for villains," Gergen said. "There is a restless searchlight on the part of the country, looking for a way to lead is out of this."
Much of the debate then continued to concentrate on the pros and cons of Clinton's foreign policy, marked by good-natured sniping between Gergen and Adams on Clinton's indecision and the incompetency of current European government. Amidst one such volley, Adams broached his chief concern with Clinton's abilities.
"I accept that currently the [leadership of the] European Union is covered by a bunch of drips who are unable to do anything," Adams acknowledged, but added that it is astonishing that a nation able to muster the muscle exhibited in the Gulf War has managed to squander the resulting universal respect, and is now perceived as vascillating and weak with no strategic vision.
"You have the most impressive military force in the world, and I'm not sure anyone will believe this president is willing to commit that force in a serious way."
Gergen indignantly responded to these remarks, questioning whether Clinton's lack of experience with an explosive situation is not a strength, rather than a weakness.
"I don't know why it's a necessity to have a serious crisis," Gergen said.
Despite this defense, Gergen did criticize Clinton's handling of the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
"I'm not sure we, as a superpower, ought to be going into a regional [war] when the powers of the region are unwilling to go in themselves. I think it's time we sent a message to the international community that we are not 911," Gergen said.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.