Debate 3 – Foreign Policy Showdown

...and so we come to the last debate. Just a reminder, this will be a return to the format of the first encounter – podiums and questions from a moderator. So no barstools and undecided voters here! One big difference however will be the focus – this is the only debate where the candidates will answer questions that are solely on foreign policy. Whilst they touched on it in the second (which covered both domestic and foreign policy), this debate allows the candidates to show the deep contrasts in their views on overseas affairs.

‘So what will the main issues be??!’, I hear the one person who reads this blog each year exclaim. Well below is a list of crucial topics that will have to be covered and covered well.

 

1. Benghazi – the death of a US ambassador in a recent terror attack is something that will have to be brought up, especially as its being mentioned in the last debate and the moderator’s interjection caused some outcry. For those who aren’t aware of the issue, Romney perceives Obama as being weak in response to the events by not naming the event as ‘a terror attack’ and by supposedly being apologetic towards Muslims in the aftermath. Romney stated this immediately after the events and has continued to make this allegation. This will be his chance to convince voters of Obama’s soft touch, whilst it will give Barack his main chance to clearly reply and rebut.  Hillary Clinton recently accepting the blame for the attack will help the President make his case (and has severely wounded Hillary’s chances of nomination in 2016 – but that’s for another time).

 

2. Afghanistan and the Taliban – the Administration’s commitment to remove US troops (currently numbering over 60,000) from Afghanistan by 2014 will no doubt be questioned by Romney as he sees it as potentially leaving the Afghans in a bad state to face the Taliban unaided. Romney has also agreed to the 2014 deadline but has kept in the proviso of only leaving under the guidance of military officials. Mitt does though face the challenge on military issues of having committed THE cardinal sin of not thanking the troops in his acceptance speech. Obama can and probably will play the death of Osama card to remind voters of that particualr military success. Those points aside, both candidates will need to balance the issues of Americans wanting troops home with Americans not wanting their soldiers to have died in vain.

 

3. Iran, nuclear warheads and Israel – Romney has been very clear on this crucial area of foreign policy, stating that Iran must not get nuclear warheads and that the US must stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel in resisting any Iranian production of atomic material. Indeed, Romney’s running-mate, Paul Ryan, has hinted at the idea of war with Iran over nuclear materials, stating that ‘the military option’ is not ‘being viewed as credible’ by the Democrat incumbent in the recent VP debate with Joe Biden. Obama’s policy has always been diplomacy over sabre-rattling and so, whilst he cannot claim clear moments of victory, he can state that the lack of a nuclear-armed Iran now is guaranteed to continue under the sanctions he has helped introduce.

 

4. Syria – one of the big foreign policy issues of the moment for the wider world is how to resolve the civil war in Syria (yes it is a civil war and it has been for some time – the BBC ran a very good piece recently on comparisons with the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39). So far the UN has not been able to control the situation, with its observation teams having withdrawn and the former Secretary-General Kofi Annan accepting his ceasefire plan never worked. The most that has happened so far is the UN securing condemnation for the Assad regime if chemical weapons are used on the rebels. Romney will want to attack Obama on perceived inactivity, Obama will want to attack Romney on his plan that aims to support and give arms to ‘responsible members of the opposition who share our interests and values’ without outlining the vetting scheme for that plan or how the US will prevent arms they have given away getting into the hands of the groups of jihadi rebels already involved in fighting in Syria. Both candidates will also want to deal with the now very large problem of the war spreading to Lebanon, which the assassination of a general the other day all but ensures.

 

5. China, currency and trade – China is rising, scary and Communist. Add in that Chinese-Americans make up a very small number of voters and you have a very handy bogeyman for both candidates to attack. For his part, Romney has promised to label China a ‘currency manipulator’ on the day he enters the White House. This is a dumb statement even though it is true – China does artificial lower the value of the Yen in order to lower the price of its products overseas. But that is the way of things and labeling China as something that everyone already knows it is won’t change the Chinese policy and won’t affect the economy. Tariffs on Chinese products won’t be raised as that only raises prices in shops whilst any statement on national debt won’t be tolerated because it enters into domestic policy. Both candidates will have to watch their words and be aware that, if they win, they may have to eat their words and get cozy with the new Chinese leaders who take power this Autumn.

 

6. And finally, Romney’s overseas debacle a few months ago. This for me created the main reason I would vote for Obama (again, with a bullet heading down the barrel of the gun that was held to my head!). Romney simply didn’t appear to be a potential national leader, a man who could take the mantle of the US and represent it fairly, justly and honourably in an overseas trip. To remind you, he questioned whether London was ready to host the Olympics (which made Dave rather angry), he mocked the culture of Palestinians and stated Jerusalem was the ‘undisputed’ capital of Israel and in Poland a Romney official told the press to ‘kiss my ass’ at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (admittedly not Romney’s fault but still very funny!). These blunders were only enhanced by the lack of press contact with Mitt, leading to one reporter (working for FOX!) memorably stating that the press felt like a ‘modified petting zoo’ as they were stuck in a bus with Poles taking pictures of them. Obama will rinse these events for all their worth – after all, whilst the topics are important, Americans will be voting on the person who will argue these topics to others, and will not suffer fools gladly. Romney on the other hand will want to defend and deflect criticism. Sadly for him, he hasn’t had a ‘Hillary’ take the blame for him, unlike Obama with Benghazi.

 

So there we go. Debate 3 begins in a few hours and will be rather interesting. Hopefully I’ll get to watch it at some point tomorrow. Romney won round one, round 2 was a tie (though if you had to pick a winner it would be Obama for making it a tie and not a defeat after the first debate) and the third and final round is on its way. I predict the President will come out on top, though I’m sure Mitt has been going over foreign policy in debate prep in the last few weeks. After all, Republicans all to easily remember Sarah Palin’s comments 4 years ago – she was ready to be VP and was clued up on foreign policy, even though she accepted the only other countries she been to before 2007 were Mexico and Canada, because..........Alaska was near to Russia. Poor John McCain.

 

Debate warmly encouraged