Obama's foreign policy a win on points

Sunday 9 September 2012

Forget Barack Obama's acceptance speech for a moment - the Democrat who stole most of the thunder in Charlotte was John Kerry, the party's most articulate and knowledgeable expert on international relations.

Custom byline text:

by trevor roylE diplomatic editor

Speaking to a rapt audience he jumped happily on the Republicans' claim that the US is much worse off under Obama than it was four years ago. Oh yes, continued the presidential hopeful of 2004, just ask Osama bin Laden if he feels the same way.

His stinging attack attracted cheers as Kerry rammed home the point that Obama has not been so dusty on the world stage as his opponents have claimed. As evidence he spoke of the beginning of the drawdown of US forces in Afghanistan, the neat unseating of Colonel Gaddafi without embroiling the US in Libya and the authorisation of the mission to take out the al-Qaeda leadership. The polished intervention will boost Kerry's claims to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State should Obama win a second term, but there was more to come. Claiming that the Republican team of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan were foreign policy tyros, Kerry accused them of outsourcing their policy-making to advisers who were little more than neo-conservatives of the same hue as those who advised the Bush administration. For many in the audience this not only made stirring listening but it was a welcome change from endless discussions on the economy and other domestic issues. Foreign policy doesn't always get a look-in at party conferences. It also went some way to divert attention from a potential pitfall in the party's platform manifesto when it was discovered that it had failed to make any mention of Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Republicans joyfully pointed out that this indicated a less than caring attitude towards America's main ally in the Middle East but as the same document was also criticised for not mentioning God, the possibilities for rebuke were endless – as if the Israeli capital and the deity were one and the same thing. Nevertheless Obama gave the order for the restitution of Jerusalem, fearful no doubt of the crucial Zionist vote being diverted to his political rival. This is a real fear for the Democrats and one that Romney wanted to exploit at his own party conference in Tampa, Florida where the Zionist vote is especially strong. It's no secret that Obama has a chilly relationship with Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu but that's more about personalities than policies. Common sense tells Obama that he has no option but to stand alongside the Israelis, whatever he thinks of their politics. Apart from the fact that Obama is commendably even-handed in his attitudes towards the Palestinians – a leaning deplored by the Republicans – both presidential candidates have adopted remarkably similar policies towards Israel and the wider Middle East. True, the words are different but the meanings are not dissimilar. Whereas the Democrats have promised an "unshakable" commitment to guaranteeing Israeli security, the Republicans claim that their obligation will be "unequivocal". There is other common ground. Both Obama and Romney insist that the Palestinian administration must learn to accept the fact of Israel's existence and both have been careful to avoid any precise requirements for the terms of a final peace settlement. On the other hand neither party manifesto has much to say on still smouldering issues such as Iraq and Somalia or the combustible problem of Syria. Kerry didn't even make any mention of the latter even though US interests are involved and will remain so if Obama is re-elected.On balance, the foreign and defence policy tussle has been a win on points for Obama. In office, he has done enough to prove that as the US commander-in-chief he is a safe pair of hands who knows what he is doing whereas for all his late burst, Romney still gives the impression of playing catch-up. Kerry was not far off the mark when he made the point that now isn't the time to be outsourcing presidential responsibilities – a final telling jab at Romney and his right-wing foreign policy advisers.

Contextual targeting label:

Finance

Commenting & Moderation

We moderate all comments on HeraldScotland on either a pre-moderated or post-moderated basis. If you're a relatively new user then your comments will be reviewed before publication and if we know you well then your comments will be subject to moderation only if other users or the moderators believe you've broken the rules, which are available here.

Moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours. Please be patient if your posts are not approved instantly.

Obama's foreign policy a win on points

Commenting & Moderation

MOST READ

SPONSORED LINKS

MOST COMMENTED