Obama v. McCain on Foreign Policy

By BJ

Cernig has already done a great job discussing Obama's foreign policy speech, so I won't bother repeating the effort, but it turns out that John McCain also gave a foreign policy speech yesterday, and Hilzoy was good enough to point out the major difference between the two candidates. When Obama talks about foreign policy, he links the various points together, acknowledging that events and resources expended in Iraq affects what can be done in Afghanistan, for example, and that's just the start.

At every other point in his speech, from dealing with the tribal regions in Pakistan, to the military and civilian aid sent to the Pakistani government, to nuclear proliferation, all the way to his energy policy, Obama links everything into a single strategic framework. While I have issues with specific proposals Obama makes, he at the very least understands that no actions on the world stage are isolated in their effects. His strategic focus ensures, or at least makes it far more likely, that US actions will be carried out in a fashion that is complimentary to the overall goals it is attempting to accomplish.

One of the major questions that should be asked when assessing strategy is: Are the overall strategic objectives and supporting activity-level objectives established and linked? For Obama, the answer is yes. And it is not just this speech, but pretty much every time the man opens his mouth that you can see this kind of strategic viewpoint. Always does he look for linkages.

And this is where McCain truly fails as a presidential candidate. He views problems on a tactical level, rarely linking them to a broader strategic picture. He has decided to copy Obama's Afghan plan, but he apparently did it without looking first at the overall picture. Since he can't put US troops in Afghanistan without drawing them out of Iraq, and since his plan for Iraq is the Bush plan of permanent occupation, he has to go out now and beg the Europeans and other allies to pony up the troops.

Its little wonder McCain wants to limit the debate to simplified tactical matters, because it is clear he lacks “that vision thing”, an overall strategic picture of where things are going and what needs to be done. The only real linkage McCain makes is the same flawed, "they're all Islamofacists who hate us for our freedoms" linkage that demands we fight every incarnation of Islamic extremism, (or just uppity, refusal to bow to the American will, people who happen to be Muslim, or can be linked to them), as though they're a single threat that must be defeated all at once instead of recognizing them as multiple movements that can be dealt with severally.

This, ultimately, is what General Clark was talking about when he made his comments on McCain's military record. Service doesn't equal strategic sense, and America needs a leader who possesses such.

Obama has it. McCain does not.

Comments

[anderson]

he has to go out now and beg the Europeans and other allies to pony up the troops.

Except, the Bushies have been doing this for years and to no avail. No one wants to go into that hell hole and McCain is crazy if he thinks that is going to change.