Current Events

On Your Way to the Polls Today:
Foreign Policy Does Matter

SARTAJ SINGH DHILLON

With today, finally, the day of reckoning in the 2012 U.S. presidential election, it would be prudent for the electorate to reconsider for a moment why foreign policy is a critical issue that should not be ignored when voting.

Contrary to what media outlets have suggested, the third presidential debate was, in many ways, the most important of the three – and demonstrably highlighted President Obama’s strengths and Gov. Romney’s weaknesses on issues of international relations, foreign policy and political history.

Both Democratic and Republican pundits alike would agree that President Obama easily dispatched his opponent, based on both substance and form.

Perhaps the most telling discussion surrounded Gov. Romney’s comment that one of his major concerns is that the “U.S. Navy has less ships than it did in 1916” and that this is a sign of military weakness. Not only does this farcical argument dismiss the military achievements of seventeen previous governments, it is manifestly absurd and calls into question the suitability of Gov. Romney’s advisors.

To understand why Gov. Romney’s assertion lacks probity, an examination of certain facts will be useful.

The evolution of US foreign policy is attributable, in large part, to its level of military preparedness and strategic naval presence. The US emerged from WWI and II with an expansive naval strategy throughout the Atlantic and the Pacific, which tremendously increased the country’s power and influence. The Sixth Fleet was vital to support US political and military mandates to maintain stability in the Mediterranean by countering security threats from Russia, the Middle East,
the Balkans and North Africa.

Unchanged in this post-Cold War era is the Fleet’s commitment to NATO, combat readiness and the capability to respond to crisis situations (i.e. Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Albania and Sierra Leone). In addition to its 285 ships, the US can and has relied on support from its NATO allies, including 100 commissioned ships deployed by the British Navy and over 30 warships by Canada.

Between three close allies, that’s well over 400 ships.

Similarly, the positioning of the Seventh Fleet demonstrates the American commitment to maintaining peace in the Western Pacific, not to mention affording it unprecedented influence.

This Fleet (larger than any other navy in the Pacific with 60 ships, 350 aircraft and 60,000 marines) was integral to the outcome of the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf wars and also helped deter a Soviet invasion of Japan while curbing hostile activity by China. The US regularly sends its carriers throughout the Pacific and its warships to key international ports to address conflict and maintain diplomatic relations.

Contrary to Gov. Romney’s argument, the US military hegemony and its national defense strategy are complex creatures that cannot be judged or ascertained simply by the number of ships in its arsenal.

President Obama has not weakened but strengthened the US national security strategy by focusing not just on naval ships or forward defense and deterrence, but also through alliance solidarity. With the tireless efforts of Hilary Clinton, the Obama administration has managed to visit 110 countries during the past term while strengthening US diplomatic ties and solidifying strategic alliances.

This spirited effort to engage in collaborative politics has rehabilitated the image of the US throughout the world and deserves the highest accolade.

We live in an increasingly globalized world and, for obvious reasons, the US has become increasingly intertwined in the business and security issues of the rest of the world. A leader grounded in strong foreign policy credentials is critical to the long-term health of the US economy and to assert that the electorate should discount foreign policy considerations during this election is a fallacy.

Lest we forget, it was George Bush’s atrocious foreign policies that contributed to the economic disaster in the US. The US economy and security is dependent upon the protection of its overseas interests and the health of its foreign relations with other sovereign nations.

America is fortunate to be in a position where it no longer needs a larger military or more ships, or false wars to achieve political goals. Is it so wrong for President Obama to suggest that savings from the aforementioned be allocated toward social programs and nation building?

The diplomacy practiced by President Obama and, by extension, Hilary Clinton has strengthened global alliances, led to more peace and stability throughout the world and has increased the US ability to deter threat while conducting prompt and sustained combat operations to terminate hostilities on terms favorable to
itself and its allies.

President Obama’s approach to foreign policy is just the kind of forward thinking that the world needs today and his efforts will surely, in due course, help propel the US and global economies back on track.

Please do not be swayed by the media, do your own diligence and look at the complete picture before voting – and I am sure that you will conclude that President Obama has earned the public’s trust to serve again.


The author has degrees in finance & economics (undergrad) and law (JD). He helps run a technology startup based in New York, USA.

November 6, 2012 

read other articles in Current Events