On the Issues :: Foreign Policy

My Top 3

It's rare that a voter will agree with his or her candidate of choice on every issue. I have three issues of greatest import relating to my choice for president. Over the next few weeks I'll outline them. If your priorities differ from mine, please note them in the comments and I'll try to address them to the best of my ability.

Issue #1 ::Foreign Policy Judgement::

Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad continues to pose a real challenge to the Western world. As recent as June, he predicted that the "satanic regime" of Israel would soon be "erased." He went on to say that the United States would be "annihilated." To quote him directly:

You should know that the criminal and terrorist Zionist regime which has 60 years of plundering, aggression and crimes in its file has reached the end of its work and will soon disappear off the geographical scene.

According to recent reports, North Korea has begun to rebuild its nuclear program.
Russia's recent treatment of the situation in Georgia and continued provocation of the Ukraine points toward a period of difficult negotiation at best and a reopening of the Cold War at worst.
The next President of the United States will be forced to face these challenges and deal with the current military conflicts taking place in Iraq and Afghanistan.

John McCain

On Russia & Vladimir Putin - May 30, 2007

Russia is probably the greatest disappointment in recent years. It has turned into a KGB oligarchy. Putin wants to restore the days of the old Russian empire, and he continues to repress democracy, human rights, and freedom of the press. Mysterious assassinations are even taking place. If oil were still $10 a barrel, Mr. Putin would not pose any kind of a threat.

McCain's statement relating to oil at $10 a barrel was made in reference to the fact that Russia controlled nearly every pipeline running between the Middle East and Europe. The largest pipeline terminated in Georgia, running through South Ossetia.

On Iraq, John McCain voted, with the vast majority of Republican and Democratic Senators to wage war on Saddam Hussein's Iraq. From the beginning, Senator McCain disagreed with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's plan to wage the war.

In defense of his continued support of the war, even after it became apparent that the primary reason for going to war (the apparent presence of Weapons of Mass Destruction) was no longer a factor, McCain said:

...whether or not Al Qaeda terrorists were a present danger in Iraq before the war, there is no disputing they are there now, and their leaders recognize Iraq as the main battleground in the War on Terror... Will this nation's elected leaders make the politically hard, but strategically vital decision to give Gen. Petraeus our full support and do what is necessary to succeed in Iraq? Or will we decide to take advantage of the public's frustration, accept defeat, and hope that whatever the cost to our security, the politics of defeat will work out better for us than our opponents? For my part, I would rather lose a campaign than a war. 4/11/2007

As early as November, 2003 John McCain claimed that, "Victory can be our only exit strategy." He went on to state that, "The simple truth is that we do not have sufficient forces in Iraq to meet our military objectives." His charges drew sharp criticism from both parties. It would be nearly four years until McCain would be vindicated. In January, 2007 President Bush announced that he would send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. One year after the surge began the results were as follows:

Attacks in Anbar province decreased from 300 in 2007 to 30. The number of attacks decreased to an average of 20, and just last week, with little notice from the American media, the United States military turned control of security in Anbar province to their Iraqi counterparts.

Attacks in Baghdad decreased by 70%.

The surge was accompanied by a spike in troop casualties, precipitated by an increase in offensive operations. Since the surge high of 126 in May 2007, monthly casualties have decreased to 23 in August, 2008.

Barack Obama

In response to Russia's invasion of Georgia, Obama released a statement that said:

I condemn Russia's decision to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states and call upon all countries of the world not to accord any legitimacy to this action. The United States should call for a meeting of the United Nations Security Council to condemn Russia's decision in coordination with our European allies. The U.S. should lead within the UN and other international forums to cast a clear and unrelenting light on the decision, and to further isolate Russia internationally because of its actions.

Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power. In order for the Council to condemn Russia's decision, Russia's representative would have to vote against his own country.

Obama later drew a parallel between Russia's invasion of Georgia and the US-led invasion of Iraq, "We’ve got to send a clear message to Russia and unify our allies. They can’t charge into other countries. Of course it helps if we are leading by example on that point." 8/21/08

In October, 2002, Barack Obama gave a speech to an anti-war rally announcing his opposition to the war in Iraq. He stated:

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perles and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Roves to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

In his book, The Audacity of Hope Obama confirmed that he shared the belief that Saddam Hussein was in possession of chemical and biological weapons. However, he sensed that, “the threat Saddam posed was not imminent.”

Senator Obama opposed the troop surge from its proposal. He stated that, "I personally think that, if there are ways that we can constrain and condition what the president is doing so that, four to six months from now, we are beginning a phased withdrawal while making sure that the troops on the ground have the equipment that they need to succeed, then that is going to be the area that I'm most interested in supporting."

In a recent interview with Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly, Obama stated that the troop surge had been more successful than anyone could have ever imagined. He refused to retract his initial opposition to the surge and complained that not enough "political reconciliation" had taken place; though a July report indicates that the Iraqi government has met all but three of the eighteen benchmarks set by Congress just last year.