In a speech at New York University last
Thursday, Vice President Joe Biden attacked Republican presidential candidate
Mitt Romney on his foreign policy, opening a new chapter in the 2012
presidential campaign.
Biden praised President Barack Obama for ending
the War in Iraq, shaping an exit strategy in Afghanistan, leading the fight
against Qaddafi in Libya, and, of course, killing Osama Bin Laden, emphasizing
the President's toughness on national security. The Vice President contrasted Obama's foreign
policy successes with Romney's "profound misunderstanding of the responsibilities
of a President and the Commander-in-Chief," mocking his misjudgments,
such as describing Russia as America's “number one geopolitical foe”.
Already before the speech the Romney campaign
responded to Biden's attack, accusing the President of turning his back on
Israel, of being too soft on Iran and Syria and for giving in to Russia's
missile defense demands.
President Obama has been criticized from
various sides for trying to negotiate with Iran, for not intervening in Syria,
and for embarrassing the US in the light of North Korea's most recent missile
launch.
In a Foreign Policy article, Dan Blumenthal
went as far as describing Barack
Obama's foreign policy as "the uncertainty
doctrine", which "made the world a more dangerous place",
adding, "With no one else to do the chores, the United States must lead
with certainty. The rest of the world may complain about our arrogance, but
that is better than complaining about utter chaos."
In the French newspaper Le Monde, Betrand
Badie, a leading international relations scholar, relativized the criticism of
Obama's foreign policy. He explained that Barack Obama never questioned the
United States' leadership in the world, but had to restore the nation's legacy
after the Bush years. Hence, Obama' s policy was less aggressive, disfavored
military action, and became more open to the world's cultural and political
diversity. Badie described Obama's foreign policy as a "passive
hegemony". However, Badie further explains that the notion of hegemony in
itself is outdated, with interdependency structuring the new game of
international politics. The game does not revolve around one leader in a
bipolar world anymore; the new game is more complex and includes an infinite
number of interdependent players.
Hence, the difficult task in this presidential
election is to present oneself as a world leader domestically, while at the
same time abiding to the new rules of the game of international politics.
Foreign Policy generally does not hugely
influence the outcome of the presidential elections, but national security probably will. While national security is traditionally a Republican strength,
Obama seems to be in a safer seat. Mitt Romney will now have to define his
foreign policy, to offer better solution than Obama and most importantly to
distinguish his propositions from Bush's doctrine. We will see how Mitt Romney
masters this challenge, but he would not be the first
governor from Massachusetts whose presidential campaign tanked because of
foreign and national security issues.
Rate this posting:
{[['
']]}
']]}