Wednesday-Night

See also: Candidates and Issues

The Economist) … Merely by becoming president, he [Obama] would dispel many of the myths built up about America: it would be far harder for the spreaders of hate in the Islamic world to denounce the Great Satan if it were led by a black man whose middle name is Hussein; and far harder for autocrats around the world to claim that American democracy is a sham. America’s allies would rally to him. … At home he would salve, if not close, the ugly racial wound left by America’s history and lessen the tendency of American blacks to blame all their problems on racism.
30 October
Is Al Qaeda Messing With Our Elections?
The front page of Drudge is hyping the much anticipated “Al Qaeda endorsement” saying that “al Qaeda Wants Republicans, Bush ‘Humiliated.” Of course Drudge’s whole point here is to try and get folks believing that Al Qaeda supports Obama. The reality is much more complicated.
29 October
Who will help shape McCain, Obama foreign policy?
(Christian Science Monitor) Both candidates would likely draw from previous administrations to build their teams.
After initially relying on some outside-the-box foreign-policy advisers, Barack Obama has surrounded himself with many well-known and longtime world-affairs practitioners. That suggests to some critics that his would be an orthodox foreign policy largely in the President Clinton mold – with an interventionist streak in times of humanitarian crisis.
John McCain lends an ear to some of the original neoconservative backers of the war in Iraq, but his team also includes Republican realists and internationalists of the George H.W. Bush tradition. That split between American idealism and pragmatism is raising questions about whether the bifurcated foreign policy of the outgoing President Bush might continue in a McCain White House.
When it comes to defining the foreign policy each would practice, the two candidates have given speeches and answered debate questions indicating where they might go. But the foreign-policy brain trusts assembled by each offer another set of clues as to how American diplomacy and power might be employed under two very different men.
28 October
Obama poses a danger to Canada: former U.S. ambassador
OTTAWA • — A Barack Obama presidency would present a “danger” to Canada because he could renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, imperiling the future economic integration of the continent, former U. S. ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci said yesterday.
Mr. Cellucci, a Republican, engaged in an overt piece of partisan politicking on Canadian soil eight days before the U. S. presidential election, telling an audience in Ottawa the Democratic Senator would face “pressure” to renegotiate NAFTA after indicating a willingness to do so during the hotly contested Ohio primary.
23 October
US: Candidates’ Worldviews Are Worlds Apart
Analysis by Jim Lobe
(IPS) WASHINGTON - While the ongoing financial crisis has almost entirely displaced foreign policy and even the Iraq War as the main concern of voters here, the differences in approach to the world beyond U.S. borders between the Republican candidate, Sen. John McCain, and his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, remain both wide and substantial.
While they agree, superficially at least, on a number of issues, such as the importance of shutting down the notorious Guantanamo detention facility, acting more aggressively to curb global warming, increasing U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and keeping all options on the table vis-à-vis Iran, their basic worldviews and instincts are far apart.
In broad terms, McCain identifies closely with the unilateralist instincts and Manichean worldview of the coalition of Israel-centred neo-conservatives and aggressive nationalists who dominated the first term of President George W. Bush’s administration and place a premium on military power, as opposed to diplomacy or other forms of “soft power”.
“Foreign policy: Obama vs. McCain” by David T. Jones
(Policy Options Oct. 2008) The sun will not set in the east on January 21, 2009 — and neither “President McCain” nor “President Obama” will dramatically reverse US foreign policy. The main elements of known challenges (Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Israel-Palestine and even Russia) are largely delineated; adjustments will be at the margins rather than at the core. David Jones, former senior diplomat at the US Embassy in Ottawa, suggests that both Senators McCain and Obama come to the fore dragging significant question marks that the arguments of “experience” versus “judgment” do little to resolve. Indeed, the major over-the-horizon challenges for the United States are likely to be yet-unknown unknowns — events that are currently beyond neat parameters of present political argument, but that will be defining for the next president.
3 October
IPS EXCLUSIVE: Interview with Barak Obama
In an exclusive interview to IPS Correspondent, Bankole Thompson, Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barak Obama talks about how the U.S. financial crisis is affecting other parts of the world, what the country needs to achieve with regards to energy security, and why foreign aid would remain a priority if he wins the White House on Nov. 4.
Flip-Flop Allegation: Obama On Missile Defense
The right is calling Barack Obama a flip-flopper after his statement during Friday night’s debate that “I actually believe we need missile defense.” The truth is a little more subtle than any charge of a flagrant flip-flop that took life that evening, but either way, Obama’s position has apparently shifted over time, and his current stance raises some questions.
28 September
McCain retracts Palin’s Pakistan comments
WASHINGTON (CNN)— Sen. John McCain retracted Sarah Palin’s stance on Pakistan Sunday morning, after the Alaska governor appeared to back Sen. Barack Obama’s support for unilateral strikes inside Pakistan against terrorists.
27 September
Sarah Palin’s Foreign Policy Follies
(Time) … the more worrisome responses were the ones that betrayed her lack of curiosity about current events and reliance on bumper-sticker wisdom over complex thoughts. There were moments, in fact, in which you wondered whether she had been paying any meaningful attention to the world outside Alaska before McCain picked her as his running mate a month ago.
26 September
No Bailout for Ailing Peace Corps
William Fisher
NEW YORK - As the U.S. government continues its planning for a 700-billion-dollar bailout of the financial sector, the Peace Corps — one of the United States’ most successful foreign policy programmes — is being cut back due to a budget shortfall of 18 million dollars.
25 September
Exclusive: Palin On Foreign Policy
Katie Couric Interviews The Candidate About Watching Russia, Her New Passport And Her Opinion Of Obama
Palin takes Manhattan
(Foreign Policy Brief) Call it foreign-affairs speed dating: In a meet-and-greet whirlwind set to last no longer than 30 hours, Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin is in the midst of her “coming out” to foreign-policy society at the United Nations General Assembly.
These fleeting encounters have the potential to backfire, but there might be more to glean from Palin’s “must meet” list than from any gaffes. James Bone of the Times, for instance, points out that her meetings with Georgian Pres. Mikheil Saakashvili and Ukrainian Pres. Victor Yushchenko are “a gesture towards a revanchist Russia,” and notes that nowhere on her agenda was there a representative of Britain. So, while this dance may be fleeting — those looking for clues about Palin’s diplomatic capabilities and the McCain camp’s foreign-policy intentions should pay close attention.
19 August
An acerbic analysis from George Monbiot gives the candidates something to ponder:
If we seek to understand US foreign policy in terms of a rational engagement with international problems, or even as an effective means of projecting power, we are looking in the wrong place. The government’s interests have always been provincial. It seeks to appease lobbyists, shift public opinion at key stages of the political cycle, accommodate crazy Christian fantasies and pander to television companies run by eccentric billionaires. The US does not really have a foreign policy. It has a series of domestic policies which it projects beyond its borders. That they threaten the world with 57 varieties of destruction is of no concern to the current administration. The only question of interest is who gets paid and what the political kickbacks will be.  The Magic Pudding
August 18
Crisis in Georgia Beginning to Turn Into a Big Political Liability for McCain
(HuffPost) At first the unfolding conflict between Russia and its neighbor the Republic of Georgia seemed to be just what the McCain candidacy needed: a foreign policy crisis that would allow him to demonstrate a “tough, decisive, experienced” mastery of foreign affairs, and a new rationale for why Americans should choose experience over change in a dangerous world.
But it hasn’t taken long for the developments in the Caucuses to become a growing political liability instead.
First, the unfolding conflict provides a fresh example of how McCain’s War in Iraq has sapped American power and weakened American security.
Secondly, as the situation in Georgia develops it becomes clearer by the day that the Bush-McCain Iraq policy has severely undercut our diplomatic options as well.
Finally, the Georgia conflict has shined a spotlight on McCain’s chief foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann.
August 13
A Cut-and-Paste Foreign Policy
By Joe Conason
(Truthdig) The discovery that John McCain’s remarks on Georgia were derived from
Wikipedia is, to put it politely, disturbing and even depressing-but not
surprising. Under the tutelage of the neoconservatives, who revealed their
superficial understanding of Iraq both before and after the invasion, he
favors bellicose grandstanding over strategic thinking. So why delve deeper
than a quick Google search?
Worse still, neither he nor his advisers yet grasp how our misadventure in
Mesopotamia has diminished American power and prestige. In fact, the
Wikipedia episode-an awful embarrassment that would have devastated the
presidential campaign of Barack Obama or any other Democrat-revealed an
underlying weakness in Sen. McCain’s vaunted grasp of foreign policy.
July 30
Afghan Ambassador Trumpets Obama Agenda
Afghanistan’s Ambassador to the United States trumpeted major portions of Barack Obama’s approach towards his country on Tuesday, marking the second time in as many weeks that an official at the center of U.S.-Mideast policy has echoed the Illinois Senator’s agenda.
Said Jawad, who has been at the ambassador’s post since 2003, avoided specific references to Obama and his rival Sen. John McCain. But on a broad range of issues that divide the two candidates — defining the main battleground in the war on terror, U.S. military commitments to Afghanistan, and combating terrorist activity in Pakistan — he agreed with the prescriptions of the presumptive Democratic nominee.
July 29
Arianna Huffington: Isn’t it strange that, according to the Washington Post, Barack Obama didn’t get a bounce from his wildly well-received overseas trip? Oh wait, according to the Chicago Trib, maybe he did. But, hey, the LA Times says it was just a small bounce. Or was it more of a bump? Perhaps a bouncelet? A ricochet? A swelling? Or was it a rash? In which case, if it lasts more than two weeks, should he see an electoral professional, or just declare victory? Of course, almost all of this analysis is based on polls taken before the end of Obama’s trip — a serious case of premature pontification. More
July 25
Obama, in Berlin, Calls for Renewal of Ties With Allies
BERLIN — Senator Barack Obama stood before a sea of cheering admirers on Thursday and sought to inspire fresh cooperation among American allies to defeat terrorism and other threats, introducing himself as a leader who could summon other nations to join the United States in confronting the world’s next challenges.
July 24
Is Obama an Israel appeaser?
By Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s Senior Political Analyst
July 22
U.S.-IRAQ: McCain Knee-Capped by Al-Maliki
Analysis by Jim Lobe
(IPS) WASHINGTON - This weekend’s surprise endorsement by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Sen. Barack Obama’s call for U.S. combat forces to leave Iraq by mid-2010 marks a serious setback to Senator John McCain, who has tried hard to depict his Democratic rival as “naïve” on foreign policy, especially with respect to Iraq.
July 16
Barack Obama tries to focus on foreign policy ahead of a tour of Europe and the Middle East
FOR the past few weeks the economy has dominated the American presidential campaign. Now the two candidates for the White House are turning to foreign policy. Barack Obama is at something of a disadvantage: he is young, his time in the Senate has been short, and his party has traditionally been seen as weaker on foreign affairs.
April 10
Asia’s Republican Leanings
Roger Cohen
Europe votes Democrat, but Asia tends Republican.
That’s the headline from the fastest-growing part of the world where, as throughout a shrinking globe, the U.S. election is arousing passionate interest.
The three largest powers — China, India and Japan — have all had reasons to view Bush with favor, and all have nagging fears about a Democratic administration. At a deeper level, they’ve felt comfortable enough with a United States playing power politics, while that strut-your-stuff style has appalled consensus-driven Europeans.
I don’t mean the Iraq invasion pleased Asians. It didn’t. But China and India rising see the world more in terms of classic balance-of-power equations, driven by the might and self-interest of nations, than through the post-sovereign European prism of international institution-building and soft power. Already, China and India are jostling for dominance, not least in the Indian Ocean and Africa.
April 8
In advance of the 2008 US Presidential election, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is releasing its 2008 Presidential Questionnaire on vital issues that are of special interest to our constituents. All three of the leading candidates have answered ten questions on issues ranging from international affairs to domestic issues. [The first seven questions are on international affairs.]
April 6
Mark Penn Resigns From Clinton Camp
(Huffington Post) Mark Penn, Sen. Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist and longtime confidant stepped down from the presidential campaign late Sunday night.
His resignation came after a politically embarrassing week during which it was reported that he met with Colombia’s ambassador to the U.S. to discuss passage of a bilateral free-trade agreement - a pact Clinton opposes.
March 27
McCain, in Foreign Policy Talk, Turns His Back on Unilateralism
(NYT) LOS ANGELES—In a wide-ranging speech on foreign policy, Senator John McCain sought Wednesday to distance himself from the unilateralism that has been a hallmark of the Bush administration, saying Americans must, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, show “decent respect to the opinions of mankind.”

“Change and continuity in US foreign policy” by David T. Jones
(Policy Options, March 2008) From Washington, David Jones looks ahead at the prospect of a new administration next January, beginning from the observation that this presidential election is very much the Democrats’ to lose. Quite apart from the historic odds against the Republicans securing a third consecutive term in office, “no one can argue that George W. Bush has a level of popularity that would convey benefits on a Republican nominee.” But how would Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the White House conduct US foreign policy differently? In what respects would US interests prevail? And how would events, always unpredictable, determine policy outcomes?
This is the Democrats’ election to lose.That doesn’t mean that it cannot be lost; parties have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in the past, but it will take strenuous efforts by the Democrats to do so on November 4, 2008.Why so?
Historically, there is a remarkable correlation of economic, political, and foreign affairs factors that leads to this conclusion more than six months before election day. First, just as it is difficult to deny an elected president a second term in office, it is even more difficult for a party to secure a third consecutive presidential victory, particularly as the party must “change horses,” given the constitutional limitation of a president to two elected terms.
Thus, since the end of the FDR-Truman domination of US politics in 1952, only George H.W. Bush secured a third term for his party (in effect Bush got Ronald Reagan’s “third term”). The exceptional popularity of Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower did not transfer to Richard Nixon in 1960. Nor did Vice President Al Gore secure President Clinton’s “third term”— indeed, one might conclude that Clinton’s most significant political legacy was Gore’s defeat. And no one can argue that George W. Bush has a level of popularity that would convey benefits on a Republican nominee; if anything, he is the equivalent of a poisoned chalice, and Republicans are grateful that they do not have to endorse his vice president as the party nominee.
Second, although the “it’s the economy, stupid” mantra has been repeated so frequently that it has devolved into cliché, even clichés have a reality basis. The United States, after extended periods of prosperity during both the Clinton incumbency and remarkable recovery after the post-9/11 plunge, has stumbled into semi-recession. We can defer to the inconclusive arguments of economists whether the recession will be long, short, or even exist at all; however, for the Democrats, the coincidence of rising unemployment, rising inflation, a falling stock market, the falling value of the dollar, rising energy costs, declining real income for average workers, surging mortgage foreclosures, losses of manufacturing jobs, and federal debt/deficit increases have the sweet smell of opportunity. They ask the classic question, “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” And the answer is likely to be “no.”
download article (PDF)