JFK’s political insights remain relevant 60 years on

Despite holding office for less than three years, former President John F. Kennedy has long been perceived by US and international publics as one of the best occupants of the White House. Kennedy’s presidency is perhaps best remembered for his foreign policy achievements, yet he also inspired many people with his domestic accomplishments.

Wednesday was the 60th anniversary of the assassination of JFK, as he is commonly known. Nov. 22, 1963, is one of those dates that stand out in history for all the wrong reasons. However, his presidency has enduring implications for politics and international relations. This is not least given the acute lack of statesmanship of recent years. Indeed, the anti-intellectual mood that brought a populist like Donald Trump to power disparages the very notion of such leadership.

Kennedy’s domestic policy successes were all the more remarkable given his small margin of victory over then-Vice President Richard Nixon in the 1960 presidential election and his lack of deep connections to a large number of key members of Congress. This hindered the passage of several key planks of what JFK called his “New Frontier” policies.

Nonetheless, major successes were achieved on this domestic agenda, including medical care for the elderly, federal aid to education and the creation of the Department for Housing and Urban Development, which still exists today. JFK also paved the way for landmark US civil rights legislation that was ultimately enacted by his successor, Lyndon Johnson, as part of his “Great Society” agenda.

Through his skillful rebalancing of hard and soft power, he powerfully renewed US global leadership

Andrew Hammond

So, in terms of domestic policy, JFK had a less expansive record of legislative success than Johnson. Historians tend to rate JFK’s presidency as “good,” rather than “great,” in large part for this reason.

Given the constraints on his domestic policy, much of JFK’s time in office was focused on foreign affairs. Through his skillful rebalancing of hard and soft power, he powerfully renewed US global leadership in the early 1960s, helping to thaw the permafrost of the Cold War. At a time when the US-Soviet rivalry was becoming heavily militarized, part of JFK’s political genius was to appreciate that the superpower contest was as much a battle for ideas as strength of force.

Here, his projection of hope and optimism, along with stirring rhetoric, appealed to US and international audiences alike, including those behind the Iron Curtain. His landmark speeches included one in June 1963 in Berlin, where he offered US solidarity with what was then West Germany, and his September 1962 “we choose to go to the moon” address.

His desire to reset US-Soviet relations was also expressed eloquently, including in a compelling speech at American University in June 1963, soon after the Cuban Missile Crisis. This was even described at the time by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev as “the greatest speech by any US president since (Franklin) Roosevelt.”

Kennedy’s renewal of US international policy was not, however, just rhetorical, as underlined by initiatives like the Peace Corps and the South America-focused Alliance for Progress. And, through landmark achievements such as the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, JFK gave substance to his ambition of moving toward international peace. For some, his presidency was a pivotal moment that helped bring about detentes and major arms control treaties in the 1970s.

For some, his presidency was a pivotal moment that helped bring about detentes and major arms control treaties

Andrew Hammond

To be sure, any objective appraisal of JFK’s period in the White House must highlight the lows as well as the highs. Major successes included his management of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was perhaps the single most dangerous moment of the Cold War. However, there was also the Bay of Pigs invasion debacle.

Nonetheless, had he not been assassinated, JFK would likely have been reelected in 1964 and it is intriguing to consider what record of success he would have accrued in a second term. This includes key domestic priorities and foreign ones too, such as whether he would have limited the US’ engagement in Vietnam, thus avoiding Johnson’s grave policy failure in that Asian nation.

Of course, the circumstances of today are transformed from those of the early 1960s. As well as the end of the Cold War, the US has experienced relative decline. For instance, its economy now accounts for less than a quarter of global gross domestic product, compared to about a third at that time.

However, the relevance of JFK’s key insights about international cooperation and peace endures. As does the wisdom of much of the way in which he harnessed US leadership and power to try to achieve these ends.

Indeed, given the ongoing information revolution, the importance of achieving a better balance between — often very expensive — hard power assets and soft power resources is perhaps even more important today for US policymakers. And this is true right across the world, from Latin America to the Asia-Pacific and the Middle East.

In the Middle East, for instance, America’s standing in numerous countries has been at a very low ebb for some decades, as surveys like Pew Global have shown. In the coming months, data is likely to confirm this challenge has only grown because of US support for Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

As JFK would have surely recognized, there is a compelling need in the coming years for a redoubling of US and wider Western efforts to win the battle for moderate hearts and minds across the region. This needs to be a multigenerational project, including a vigorous reassertion of US soft power.

Taken together, JFK’s key insights about politics and international relations retain much relevance and appeal today. For this reason alone, his presidency will continue to hold enduring value, and also act as a source of inspiration, across the world for years to come.

• Andrew Hammond is an Associate at LSE IDEAS at the London School of Economics.