Informacion Internacional - Elecciones EEUU World of Trouble

7/27/2019 Informacion Internacional - Elecciones EEUU World of Trouble

1/4

Foreign policyA world of troublesThe economy has dominated the campaign, but there are serious foreign-policy issues to grapple withOct 6th 2012 | from the print edition

THE trouble with foreign policy, a sage diplomat once observed, is that it involves

foreignersand they dont always do what they are told. In the last weeks beforean election dominated by economics, in which geopolitics has often seemed an

afterthought, the world seems full of foreigners refusing to bow to American adviceand imprecations.

Mitt Romney has a simple explanation: allies have lost faith in America andopponents have been emboldened by Barack Obamas inconstancy and lack ofresolve. The president, Mr Romney charges, is ambivalent about American might,and embarrassed to assert Americas unique destiny as leader of the free world. ARomney presidency, he vows, would follow Reagans dictum of peace through

strength, whether economic, military or moral, unapologetically championing suchAmerican values as free trade and democracy.

The Obama camp offers a more nuanced explanation. America remains theindispensable nation, but is not omnipotent. The world can be confounding, asHillary Clinton, the secretary of state, sadly noted in the wake of the murder inSeptember of her ambassador to Libya in Benghazi, a city saved from destructionby American air power.

Senior officials argue that Mr Obama inherited two costly, divisive wars that had

diminished Americas standing. Ending them was a prerequisite for a new era ofengagement based on mutual respect.

The world demands American attention, but resents American meddling
http://www.economist.com/


2/4

A big disappointment of his first term, Mr Obama has told aides, was theintractability of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. He had hoped tounblock this by reaching out to the Muslim world, starting with his speech in June2009 in Cairo. If he could lessen Muslim antagonism towards the West and Israel,

that would make Israel safer and so more willing to consider concessions for Middle

East peace. That plan failed, as Arab opinion chided Mr Obama for remainingessentially pro-Israel, and his critics in Israel fretted about American abandonment.

Some of the purported gulf between the two men is more rhetorical than real. Yetin important areas they see the world differently. Start with the most worryingcrisis: Irans pursuit of nuclear weapons. American officials point to toughenedsanctions imposed on Iran after much cajoling of allies. They note Mr Obamas vowthat Iran cannot be allowed to threaten the world with nuclear weapons. Inpractice, the administration seems almost as worried by the prospect of a unilateral

Israeli strike, especially one that only grazes Iran in the absence of Americanhelp, eg, with specialist bunker-busting munitions. The chairman of the joint chiefs

of staff, General Martin Dempsey, has publicly suggested that a lone Israeli attack

would probably not destroy Irans nuclear programme and has called for sanctionsto be given a chance to succeed.

The Romney camp promises still tougher sanctions, if need be without UN SecurityCouncil backing. In private, Romney advisers also endorse calls from BinyaminNetanyahu, Israels prime minister, for nuclear red lines to be defined which Iranwould not be allowed to crosscalls resisted to date by the Obama administration.Though Mr Romneys team of foreign-policy advisers is diverseranging from suchhawks as John Bolton to more cautious figures like Robert Zoellickone adviser

reports a lot of support among them for the idea that it would be safer forAmerica to join an Israeli strike, rather than see Israel go it alone.

On September 20th, asked about red lines for action on Iran, Mr Romney called it

unacceptable for Iran to possess not just a nuclear weapon but the capability ofbuilding one, which he defined as having not only fissile material, but bomb-making capability and rocketry. Separately a private speech to donors was leaked,months after its secret recording in May, in which Mr Romney said that Palestinians

have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace. In contrast, Mr Obamadescribed Israel as merely one of our closest allies in the region in a television

interview aired on September 23rd, and seemed to dismiss lobbying from MrNetanyahu over Iran as noise.

On Syria, Mr Obama has set a public red line: the use or movement of chemical

weapons from the regimes stockpiles. America has called for regime change andsupplied non-lethal equipment, such as radios, to the rebels. But officials caution


3/4

against drawing parallels with Libya, where the rebels were aided by American-ledNATO air power. Syria, they say, has one of the most sophisticated, Russian-madeair-defence systems in the world.

Mr Romney supports the arming of anti-Assad insurgents, in collaboration with

Turkey and Saudi Arabia. His campaign has criticised Mr Obama for seeking UN

Security Council backing for his Syria policies, thereby giving Russia and China aveto as permanent council members. But Mr Romney, to date, rules out Americanmilitary action in Syria.

In the broader Middle East, Mr Romney has called the Arab Spring a misnomer,claiming that a lack of attention to promoting democracy risks turning the uprisingsinto an Arab Winter. Mr Romney has accused Mr Obama of throwing Israel

under the buswhether by criticising it in public at the UN, or by demandingIsraeli concessions as a precondition for new peace talks. His White House would

forcefully warn Turkey and Egypt against adopting anti-Israel policies and wouldreduce assistance to the Palestinians if they continued to seek UN recognition or

formed a unity government including Hamas, the Islamist movement.

The Romney plan for Afghanistan is less detailed. Republicans condemn MrObama for naming 2014 as a final date for the withdrawal of American combatforces, accusing him of allowing the Taliban to wait patiently for the West to leave.Mr Romney says he would ask commanders on the ground about troop withdrawalson taking office. Privately, advisers admit that war-weary voters will not tolerate a

re-escalation in Afghanistan.

Earlier this year Mr Romney called Russia Americas number one geopolitical foe,

prompting Mr Obama to say that his opponent was stuck in a cold-war time warp.Mr Romney says that he was talking about Russias role as a big nuclear power

willing to vote against America and other Western allies in the Security Council. Mr

Romney calls President Vladimir Putin a man who believes the Soviet Union wasgreat, not evil and criticises Mr Obamas reset of relations with Russia, sayingthe president secured very little in return for some big concessions. He says giftshanded to Russia included an offer to reduce the number of American-deployednuclear warheads and an apparent willingness to delay an anti-ballistic-missiledefence system planned for deployment in eastern Europe, which Russia portraysas a threat to its interests. Yet Mr Romneys actual prescriptions for Russia policy

are less dramatic than his diagnosis. They include reviewing Mr Obamas decisionsabout arms reductions, and a second look at how to build an effective defence

system against the threat of ballistic-missile attacks from rogue states such as Iran.A Republican adviser to the Romney campaign asserts that, behind closed doors,the geopolitical rival that provokes a visceral reaction from the candidate isChina. Mr Romney thinks that the Chinese authorities are bullies, says theadviser. Certainly, Mr Romney is fond of calling the Chinese cheaters who abusethe rules of free trade, notably when addressing blue-collar voters. He vows that onhis first day in the White House he would declare China a currency manipulator,and accuses Mr Obama of doing nothing to stop China from keeping the value of its

currency artificially low.

Such talk alarms some business leaders, who fear that a high-profile currency clashwould trigger a nationalist backlash within China. Privately, Mr Romneys inner

circle plays down the significance of calling China a currency cheat, arguing that itmerely triggers a Treasury probe. They prefer to talk about Chinese theft ofintellectual property, suggesting that on that front a President Romney would workwith allies to pressure Beijing.


4/4

In his campaign manifesto, Mr Romney says America should expand its navalpresence in the western Pacific, and that China should be shown that seekingregional hegemony would be costlier than becoming a responsible partner in theinternational system. The manifesto grumbles that North Koreas despotic regimehas been given endless inducements to give up its nuclear programme, only to

expand its arsenal. Yet, as in other areas, Mr Romney gives himself lots of wriggle

room. His manifesto does not vow to sell advanced weapons to American allies inAsia, but only to reconsider that ticklish question. Americas objective, it sayssoothingly, is not an anti-China coalition.

In part, this is a recognition of global power shifts, for all that Mr Romney talks ofmaking this a second American century. But it may also reflect the businessman

beneath his political exterior. Asked what fascinates Mr Romney in foreign policy,an adviser unhesitatingly answers: economic growth. A free-marketeer byinstinct, Mr Romney pledged during the Republican primaries to resist calls to bailout euro-zone banks or governments with American money. Europe can look afteritself, he said.

Whoever occupies the White House will find a world that still craves American

recognition, demands American attention, but resents American meddling. MrObama learned this the hard way in his first years in office, taking too long torealise that his cool, reticent persona was doing real harm to relations with long-

standing allies. Mr Obama has learned to show a bit more warmth, or at least tofeign it. Mr Romneywho managed to insult the (ever-touchy) British during asupposedly easy foreign jaunt to the London Olympicsis also a chilly sort. Ifelected, he too will have to learn the art of making foreigners feel loved, withoutreceiving much love in return. Nobody said being the indispensable nation waseasy.

Documents

Informacion Internacional - Elecciones EEUU World of Trouble