"What Richardson should instead say is that the solutions are not in the hands of a single nation but rather require the cooperation of many nations."

And why would he say that? Unless the problems that the solutions address are common problems shared by interconnected societies, which is what he said.

"Basically, he wants to be incredibly engaged while simultaneously rejecting unilateralism while keeping the option of unilateralism open."

Yeah, and so? Multilateral engagement, with unilateralism reserved, as always, if absolutely necessary. You seriously think this is the same as the Bush approach?

"Transforming American imperialism, we might call it."

If you wish to define imperialism as any non-isolationist strategy, then fine. Call it that if you want. But shifting the balance between using hard and soft power toward a more sensible mix is certainly a different path than the one we are on now.

"Shorter Bill Richardson: We should continue the Bush Administration’s foreign policy but hire new speechwriters."

This is so lame. Every point he lists in this paragraph is a marked departure from Bush administration policy. You seem to be trying to argue that unless a candidate adopts a Paulian isolationism, then its really the Bush policies that they will follow. I actually find this quite stunning. I know that you are engaged enough in foreign policy issues to know better.

"Well, we’re talking now, just behind the scenes rather than publicly.'

After over 6 years of refusing to do so.

"With Russia, our first priorities should be securing loose nukes...
Aren’t those our priorities now?"

So what have we accomplished in 6+ years on this issue? Please tell Sam Nunn - he is dying to know too.

"Are we going to create more jobs or address worker rights and the environment? Those are conflicting goals, after all."

huh? How are they conflicting goals? The clean technologies necessary for an improved environment will probably be one of the major growth industries of the century. And worker's rights conflict with job growth? Hello,,,didnt we go through this argument about a century ago in this country?
Here is a hint, James. When worker's rights are protected, one has the conditions in place to grow a middle class, which in turn opens up enormous markets for further growth.

"Right. But what does “taking the lead” mean, exactly? "

I guess you Republicans are really ready for retirement if you need to ask that question. How about 1) put it on the global agenda. 2) demand action from international organizations 3) use economic leverage to directly affect the conditions, and /or to incentivise alliances to address the issues. Y'know, the kind of stuff we used to do.

"India and China aren’t ready to turn that corner just yet, though."

Oh, so we should just sit around and way till they are? Or maybe try to entice them forward?

"I’d point out that we weren’t doing any of those things before 9/11 and were still attacked. Ipso facto, then, this won’t solve the problem."

We were attacked by 19 guys with boxcutters. From a movement that was much smaller than it is now. So yeah, his approach will not eradicate every last person with terroristic tendencies. But it does move in the right direction.

"The United States also needs to start paying attention to the Americas.
When, precisely, did we stop?"

Around 10AM Eastern time, 11 September, 2001.

"We need the United States government to hand out mesh in the 3rd World?"

Yeah, aint it a riot!! Ha Ha. Helping a few million people avoid malaria, for a pittance of cost. What a comedian this Richardson!

"Ultimately, Richardson’s “New Realism” has much in common with Bush’s “Neo-Conservatism.”"

They would both be foreign policies of the United States of America. Beyond that, I see almost no similarities whatsoever.

We've seen this before at the Harvard International Review a couple of months back. You posted on it at the time.

I realized this after the fact. It appears to be a different piece, though, outlining the same basic vision.

only our military withdrawal can break the stalemate and open up new political possibilities

It will certainly open up new possibilities. Can he explain how any of them can be beneficial to the US?