Just one more debate. On Monday night, October 22, Bob Schieffer, President Obama, and Governor Romney will treat 60+ million Americans to a discussion on American foreign policy. The candidates are going to share their visions for managing the most complex global environment in U.S. history. So far, foreign policy analysis in the debates has been dominated by partisan responses to the terrorist attack on American diplomatic personnel in Libya. Many questions about other serious foreign policy issues remain unaddressed or underspecified.
These underwhelming foreign policy debate performances spurred collaborative discussion among the Editorial Board of the National Strategy Forum to recalibrate the October 22 debate to achieve sharper policy distinctions. I am a member of the NSF Editorial Board. The National Strategy Forum is a national security think tank based in Chicago. Since 1983, we have been dedicated to non-partisan public education and research on U.S. national strategy and national security policy. Its leadership and members pride themselves in asking the right questions, providing options, and focusing on strategy rather than tactics.
In that spirit, the National Strategy Forum Editorial Board proposes ten hard-hitting questions that moderator Bob Schieffer should ask the candidates on October 22nd:
1. Iran and Israel: Economic sanctions have not halted Iran's nuclear enrichment program, and Israel is increasingly concerned about the existential threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon. You have both identified preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon as a "red line". How close do you think we are to this "red line"?
2. Conflict in Syria: You both favor the Assad regime leaving power. Who and what takes its place, and what is the effect on U.S. strategic interests in the region?
3. The Arab Spring: New governments have arisen as a result of this revolutionary process. Which of the new governments comes close to reflecting the model of democratic governance that the U.S. favors in the Middle East, and how should the U.S. engage these new governments?
4. Afghanistan: Joint U.S.-NATO withdrawals are scheduled for completion by 2014. What is your military commitment to Afghanistan after the U.S. and NATO withdrawal?
5. China and the Asia-Pacific: President Obama's administration promoted the Strategic Pivot to Asia in 2011, aimed at a reshuffling U.S. military, economic, and foreign policy assets towards the Asia-Pacific region. At a time when other key regions in the world -- particularly the Mediterranean and the Middle East -- are "on fire," was it wise to publicize this Pivot so widely?
6. International Law of the Sea: Tensions between China, Japan, and ASEAN are at a high over maritime disputes in the East and South China Seas. Recent offshore gas discoveries by Cyprus and Israel promise to enhance Europe's energy security, but Turkish hostility towards Israel and its continuing occupation of Cyprus threaten to prevent full realization of this energy potential. How would you defuse such maritime disputes, and can this be done without the ratification of the International Law of the Sea Convention?
7. Russia: President Obama's "re-set" efforts towards Russia were not reciprocated. Vladimir Putin continues to pursue an anti-American foreign policy agenda, creating significant headwind for U.S. foreign policy objectives around the globe. What is your strategy for the American relationship with Russia?
8. Mexico: This country is struggling to assert the rule of law. U.S. demand for drugs and the cross-border wage discrepancy are major drivers of drug-related violence and illegal immigration from Mexico. What will be your foreign policy objective regarding Mexico, a country critical to U.S. homeland security?
9. Sequestration: Diplomacy without teeth is useless. Much has been made of the scheduled defense cuts at the end of this year. What kind of national defense do you believe we can afford, and how does your vision affect America's ability to project power abroad?
10. International Organizations: The U.S. has a powerful voice in international financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank. Would you use that influence to ensure economic stability and viability of the euro zone?
The answers to these questions, and others that have been part of the debates, will shape our world for years to come. The American people -- indeed the world -- deserve more than rote answers on foreign policy visions or rehashed party lines of Ambassador Stevens' killing. The National Strategy Forum has, once again, asked the right questions. Now let's hope we can get some clear answers.
Follow Endy Zemenides on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HellenicLeaders
William Astore: Sham Debates and Endless War: The Shame of Our Political Discourse
Peter Yeo: The Final Debate: How the Candidates Win on Foreign Policy
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Here's the news story I found this on:
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13221476-romney-family-buys-voting-machines-through-bain-capital-investment
However it’s brought up. I wish someone would make it clear; the type of politics being played can lead to difficulties for this country. Security clearances were issued for a reason. Far too many people seem to be waiting, to write a book, go to the news media, or get online. None of these people have the full picture, of an operation. They take the knowledge they have and run with it. This could jeopardize lives of people working in other areas. Example: The U.S. Army, the U.S. Navy, and a State Department officer could be working on the same case. Yet, neither one knows about the other. When one goes public with THE story. It could be just the information the other side needed to complete their information. It could also be the information needed to get the others killed.
The same thing could happen from all these Congressional investigations. Political witch hunts to embarrass the party in power; and to help the person(s) seeking office. Trying to score political points, by bringing the other party down before the debates. Pointing fingers and finding faults the same day of the incident. Having Congressional hearing on the cause of the problem, before any evidence is gathered, is sad.
This is a game where we ALL could lose. While trying to defeat the other party, we may be giving too much to our enemies in the long run, for our short tern goals.
jobs programs for it's unemployed,
to repair it's crumbling infrastructure,
and education for it's young...................
spends almost as much on IT'S military...........as the Rest of the World...COMBINED?
This should be on the comedy section
"Winston could not definitely remember a time when his country had not been at war."
Why did the President not come out publicly to tell Harry Reid to review the Houses budgets for four years the country has not operated with a budget?
Why has the President never been asked about the Dr Fix and what happens if it is not being fixed What is going to happen to the public with the lack of Drs taking medicare and medicaid.
Exactly how many THOUSANDS of NEW IRS staff will be added as a result of Obamacare.
How are you planning to pay for their salaries?