Dissing Michael O’Hanlon

February 15, 2008 | by Alex Evans | More on Influence and networks, North America | No comments

Henry Farrell at Crooked Timber is wondering who counts as the “foreign policy community”:

Given the vagueness of boundaries, the best definition I’ve been able to come up with is the following. Anyone who has a credible chance of being able to publish a single authored article in one of a small number of key journals qualifies as a member of the foreign policy community. The list of journals would certainly include Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy ; I think that there is a strong case to be made too for The National Interest and The American Interest. There may be one or two others, depending on how expansively you want to define it. These journals provide, in a sense, a sort of rough and ready credentialling mechanism.

Lest you wonder why he’s asking, it’s in response to Spencer Ackerman at the Washington Independent  - who, we learn, is not a fan of Brookings scholar Michael O’Hanlon:

Michael O’Hanlon is a Brookings Institution defense expert who doesn’t actually know anything about defense. He does, however, know how to be a reliable barometer of what very-slightly-left-of-center establishment types believe should be said about defense. If anyone in the foreign-policy community respects O’Hanlon, I haven’t met him or her. I remember being at a barbecue in 2005 and remarking that O’Hanlon has never had an interesting thought in his life when an aide to John Bolton stood up, pumped the air with both fists, and bellowed, “Preach it, brother!”

Related posts

1. Michael Jackson: the foreign policy angle (updated)
2. Michael Chertoff’s blog
3. Live blogging Michael ‘Heckuva Job’ Brown
4. Michael Chertoff heads major new US plan to halt climate change
5. Why people ARE reading your think-tank’s latest report

Comments are closed.