James Parker
The third presidential debate focused on the hotly contested topic of foreign policy. Much like the Bush administration’s, President Obama’s foreign policy has been indelibly marked by its role in the Middle East. Finding success in Libya and in the killing of Osama bin Laden, but floundering in its response to the protests in Tahir Spring and receiving criticism for drone attacks in Palestine, it becomes clear that the military provides the best approach in the War on Terror.
In spite of critiques directed at the Obama administration regarding foreign policy, multiple facets of their stances on the subject may sway voters who regard foreign relations to be of the utmost importance. Because of the presence of multilateral organizations and increased globalization, Obama’s expertise and his academic and personal background make him a quintessential leader. Furthermore, his innate adroitness in handling foreign relations is amplified by the expansive skills of Vice President Biden, who served as former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who garnered experience in the field of foreign relations as a junior senator and as First Lady.
The Romney/Ryan ticket, however, withers under scrutiny. Their experience in foreign relations simply is not comparable to that of Obama. Apart from his work as a missionary in France during the late 1960s and his work with foreign investors at Bain Capital, the Governor’s experience is best described as non-existent. This was made painfully clear during his trips to Israel and to the Olympic Games in London. His fumbling and tactlessness were subject to ridicule by politicians around the world.
The Governor was quoted saying, “A few things were disconcerting” about London’s handling of the Games. Responding to Romney, Prime Minister David Cameron said, “of course it’s easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere.” Romney continued his gauche blundering when he insinuated that Palestine was less of an economic success than Israel due to cultural differences.
The Governor’s position on foreign policy demonstrates severe misunderstanding of power dynamics in the twenty-first century world. His “might is right” methods are similar to that of the Bush era that prompted international backlash.
It is important that voters are informed of the shortcomings of both candidates. However, Gov. Romney’s regression to an America of the past that essentially overemployed its economic and military might to bully others into submission is utterly alarming. The Romney campaign needs to be aware that America today has evolved substantially from the country it was 60 years ago. When the Governor paints Russia as one of our nation’s greatest enemies he threatens to send this country back in time. The Cold War and World War II made the United States a beacon of democracy and diplomacy that other nations could follow. Conversely, economic unions form worldwide and become crucial in developing markets, we are poised to fall from the lofty position our nation has taken.
The time has come for the reality of the world we live in to be addressed more openly by moderators and campaigns alike, so that the development of diplomatic and military strategies can be facilitated with ease, mirroring this period of rapid evolution we find ourselves in, which the Obama administration is simply better equipped to handle.