Mitt Romney delivered his foreign policy speech at the Virginia Military Institute on Monday, with the aim of defining what his foreign policy priorities would be if he wins the general election in November. We should take a look at what the esteemed Republican candidate told us on Monday.
Well, Romney, there are two main problems with what you said – one, you didn’t talk about much other than the Middle East, and two, you didn’t say anything novel.
First things first, Romney – America is a global power. Ergo, the Middle East is not the only thing Washington worries about. Stay with me, now.
On the Middle East: As unfortunate as the killing of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was, it combined with the protests across the entire Middle East to say one thing: The region wants to see less America, not more America. You can't get any clearer than that.
On the Islamic Winter: The Muslim Brotherhood won by popular choice in Egypt, as did Hamas in Palestine in 2006. The latter is the offshoot of the former, and yes, neither is America’s friend. Now, who are we to talk about democracy in the Middle East, after supporting Egypt’s Mubarak for 30 years? Or Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, a totalitarian monarchy and its proxy, also exporters of radical Islam and financiers of international terrorism? Oh, yes, they’re key nondemocratic allies ... Romney, history has reverberations and effects in time, you’d do well to remember that. And, that’s democracy in practice – we got what we asked for, so now, we just gotta deal with it.
On Israel: Romney, you can’t blame President Obama for not doing enough for Israel, because the Persian Gulf is teeming with American warships. If America is good at something, it’s not abandoning allies, and certainly not Israel. Even if Obama and Netanyahu are behaving like two drama queens with each other, it’s a non-issue. So, drop it.
On American values: Romney, you spent a lot of time talking about how American values define foreign policy. What do we want? Freedom, democracy, the rights of the individual, and democratic institutions. Now, I can attest personally that the people in America do indeed share those values – if the American state reflected those values fully, Gary Johnson would not be an increasing factor in the presidential race, nor would Washington be as deadlocked as it is. Moreover, Romney, the people of Iraq would rather not have been democratically bombed and left with a destroyed country and a million less compatriots. Here’s what you should be realizing: the American people have their values in place, but the government seems to be disconnected from its professed values to the actions it practices as far as foreign policy is concerned. Is it a crisis of values we’re having here? Care to comment?
On Russia: No compromise with Putin ... Russia is our #1 geopolitical enemy. Good job, Romney, even Reagan is laughing at you from the grave. Putin is probably even more conservative than the average Tea Partier, and he is indeed a tough person to work with – it takes a politician, not a demagogue to do that, Romney. So, any other ideas? (Hint: read up about Charles de Gaulle.)
On China: Well, Romney, yes – America did take a strategic pivot to Asia, but what do you have to add? That China is a currency manipulator? What of the Fed, then, printing its heart out in what might backfire as massive hyperinflation in America – I guess they’re currency manipulators too? What did you say on China anyway this time around, I seem to have missed the memo?
Overall, Mitt, if you want to be taken seriously in foreign policy, at least open Wikipedia more often. Please remember, the world is not just the Middle East, it’s much bigger!
Shocker, I know.