A Foreign Policy Void in GOP 2012 Field

May 5, 2011 RSS Feed Print

WASHINGTON— The daring nighttime raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan draws a sharp contrast between President Barack Obama and a field of potential Republican challengers who have comparatively scant foreign policy experience.

That field includes at least six current or former governors, and three current or former House members. The Senate, an incubator for international affairs expertise, doesn't have a single member running for president, although one former senator has taken steps toward a run.

The stunning news of bin Laden's death has temporarily focused attention on foreign policy over domestic issues, and highlighted the lack of international experience in the prospective GOP field compared with the president, a Democrat who has spent more than two years overseeing two wars and, more recently, military action in Libya.

None of the Republicans weighing candidacies is a foreign policy heavyweight, and all are working to boost their credentials by traveling to distant lands and weighing in on overseas matters.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, seen within the GOP as a credible voice on fiscal issues, bluntly acknowledged earlier this week to reporters that he was "probably not" ready to debate Obama on foreign policy. He was saying publicly about himself what other Republicans say privately about the entire field. [See photos of reactions to Osama bin Laden's death.]

A handful of likely contenders planning to attend a GOP debate Thursday in South Carolina are likely to get at least one question dealing with national security, diplomatic affairs or bin Laden's death. Continued criticism of Obama's Libya policies is expected. And the dramatic killing of the al-Qaida leader may force the White House hopefuls to sharpen their international talking points and proposals sooner rather than later.

Bin Laden's death is likely to "increase calls for us to leave Afghanistan and cut off aid to Pakistan," Republican consultant John Feehery said.

Foreign policy plays a big role in every presidential election, even if domestic issues usually dominate.

Americans typically say they want a president with a solid international resume, but they don't always vote that way.

[Vote now: Is Obama right not to release post-mortem Osama bin Laden photos?]

With few exceptions, governors have little or no meaningful foreign policy experience. Yet since 1976, three governors (Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton) have defeated incumbent presidents. And Texas Gov. George W. Bush defeated a vice president. Obama himself had thin foreign policy credentials when he defeated Sen. John McCain, a Vietnam war hero who was heavily involved in national security matters for years.

Among this crop of Republicans weighing candidacies, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman may have the most immediate and concentrated foreign experience, having just finished his stint as U.S. ambassador to China. Huntsman was a young Mormon missionary to Taiwan, and he speaks Mandarin Chinese. He also has served as U.S. ambassador to Singapore and U.S. trade ambassador.

Conversely, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, who is in her third term, may have the most modest international experience of those weighing bids. She has traveled to Iraq and has been a member of the House Intelligence Committee since January.

Tags:
Tim Pawlenty,
Osama bin Laden,
Congress,
democratic party,
national security terrorism and the military,
Newt Gingrich,
2012 presidential election,
republican party,
Associated Press,
Mitt Romney

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Those were two very repetitive statements my father used over and over. Its like learning how to do laundry, seperating my whites from the colors allowed me to see the quality that bleach and water could do if used. Some days, while facing the importance of such a thing, today I just recall the continuation of chicken-a la king and salad repetitively while sometimes getting two or three whoppers on the weekends.

Aside from the innaccuracy that some of these numbers we are fed, the daily news that we pay for....via electricity or the areas city newspaper...I found that The University of Texas distributes a local newspaper called the DAILY TEXAN. ITS spectacular!

danton of TX 2:28PM May 08, 2011

You can't leave Ron Paul out anymore when talking about GOP candidates and pretend to be an honest news source. He is the only one that can be trusted to run our foreign policy after nearly a decade of continiuous war and the Democrats failure to end them. MSM people and the establishment of both parties are scared to death of him and righly so, they have failed ad its time for a new foreign policy of non-interventionism.

Steve of NE 4:27PM May 07, 2011

Cutting federal spending again looms as the topic that will "suck the air out of" the topics arena, Capitol Hill. All else will shrink to unimportance--at least for now. In order that Democrats arrive there prepared, I've put together my "can't lose" approach to cutting federal spending, an approach so simple that Republican candidates for the presidency will tremble

Those on the Right will be there with their usual targets for cuts in tow. In general, that means anything that smacks of big government, nanny government, and federal waste. More specifically, look to these as Republican targets: Obamacare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, federal agencies and departments not favored by the Right, and anything at all that can be privatized to get it out of the federal fiscal pot.

A whole lot of cutting possibilities, no?

Here's where the Republican field for the presidency comes in, so be alert, Democrats. Everyone in the field will show their ignorance of foreign policy by wanting to avoid cutting National Security. (Some might not even know what "National Security" involves.) Since Empire could well be all there is to GOP foreign policy, meaningfully cutting that sacred cow would be more painful than pulling teeth, more threatening than raising taxes, more disgusting even than homosexuality.

Come prepared to announce that in lean times, spending on National Security more than the rest of the world COMBINED is an unaffordable extravagance. We're in lean times, not flush times when the benefits of projecting our power everywhere in the world--more than 700 military installations internationally--can be justified on several grounds. More than $1 trillion a year spent on National Security by a nation $14.5 trillion in debt and running a $1.5 trillion annual deficit, though? It's a no-brainer except to those who think that Empire is good foreign policy, the very same folks, likely, who will argue 'til kingdom come that significant cuts to programs helpful in this country and which bring revenue in, like Social Security and Medicare, are where we should cut big-time.

Hop right on the Right for their extravagant ways while undermining life support for the less fortunate in this country. Which brings up Medicaid, by the way, our way REALLY of helping the less fortunate.

Those running as Republicans for the presidency will be hard pressed to talk foreign policy at all when Right-wing motivation for extravagance on National Security is exposed for what it is.

And you now DO know what that motivattion is, don't you?

Ron W. Smith of UT 4:50PM May 06, 2011

Photo Galleries

Before and After the Joplin Tornado

A look at Joplin one year after the deadly tornado.

advertisement

Latest Video