National
security and foreign policy have received short shrift in the 2012
presidential-election campaign. Mitt Romney made a quick swing through
Britain, Israel, and Poland to suggest he would repair strained
relations with America’s closest allies. President Obama has repeatedly
reminded voters that he gave the order to kill Osama bin Laden. That’s
about it.
For the most part, each campaign has sung a single note: Romney has
tried to convince voters he can fix the broken economy. Obama has tried
to convince voters that Romney is a heartless, plutocratic tax cheat
and, possibly, a murderer to boot.Consequential international issues should be part of the debate. Among them: In Seoul on March 26, Obama was caught on tape assuring then–Russian president Dmitri Medvedev, Russian strongman Vladimir Putin’s factotum, that he would have “more flexibility” after the U.S. presidential election. He stressed that this would be “my last election” — implying that once that chore was out of the way he would no longer need to worry about voters and what they think.
What was Obama promising to be more flexible about? The microphone picked up the phrase “these issues — but particularly missile defense.” Putin, of course, has long insisted that the U.S. leave itself permanently vulnerable to a Russian missile attack, that the U.S. not utilize its cutting-edge technology to protect people and property from offensive missiles that might be fired by Russians.
Read more: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/314108/obama-s-future-flexibility-clifford-d-may
No comments:
Post a Comment