Policy coherence can suffer as a result. The central challenge of foreign policy governance today is to translate a general desire for American engagement in world affairs into practical policies. Doing that requires keeping legitimate differences over America s role in the world within productive bounds. Whether Washington will meet this challenge is by no means guaranteed. One solution not to be hoped for is the emergence of a Soviet-style threat.
Threats can produce agreement, but only at great cost.
At the same time, the solution for which all could hope a national debate that produces a consensus about America s role in the world is not likely. The 2000 presidential election campaign provides the opportunity for such a debate, but public apathy and divisions within the two parties encourage candidates to avoid foreign policy issues. To the extent they do talk about the world abroad, candidates will be looking to allay voters fears about their foreign policy competence rather than to rally them around a grand strategy. The same sentiments hold true on the Democratic side of the aisle. With no new foreign policy consensus likely to save the day, the key to avoiding foreign policy gridlock is political leadership.