A couple of years ago, as debate over the New START nuclear treaty was intensifying, Mitt Romney decided to weigh in on the debate with an op-ed, hoping to demonstrate some acumen on international affairs. It didn't go well. Fred Kaplan wrote at the time, "In 35 years of following debates over nuclear arms control, I have never seen anything quite as shabby, misleading and -- let's not mince words -- thoroughly ignorant as Mitt Romney's attack on the New START treaty."
Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.), arguably the Republican Party's most respected voice on foreign policy, issued "an unusually harsh statement," calling Romney out for his nonsense.
Two years later, Romney isn't done pretending he deserves a seat at the big-kids' table. After President Obama signaled yesterday his intention to negotiate with Russia on missile defense in a second term, the former governor was indignant.
The key quote in the clip was Romney arguing, in reference to Russia, "[T]his is without question our number one geopolitical foe, they fight every cause for the world's worst actors, the idea that [President Obama] has more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling indeed."
For one thing, Obama didn't talk about more flexibility for Russia; he talked about more flexibility for himself, urging Russian leaders to be patient until after the election season. There's a big difference between the two.
For another, calling Russia the nation's "number one geopolitical foe" has renewed a debate over whether Romney understands these issues as well as he thinks he does.
The Democratic National Committee, for example, distributed this statement from former Secretary of the Navy Richard Danzig:
"Governor Romney offered his judgment today that Russia is our nation's number one geopolitical foe. This conclusion, as outdated as his ideas on the economy, energy needs, and social issues, is left over from the last century. Does Governor Romney believe that a Cold War foreign policy is the right course in the twenty-first century? Does he believe that Russia is a bigger threat to the U.S. today than terrorism, or cyberwarfare, or a nuclear-armed and erratic North Korea?
"Oddly, before calling Russia our number one foe, he issued a foreign policy white paper that only got around to Russia after sections on China, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Middle East, Iran, North Korea, and Latin America. His most recent statement is yet another revelation that Mitt Romney repeatedly speaks inconsistently and in ways that are disconnected from twenty-first century realities."
The white-paper Danzig mentions referred to a 42-page foreign policy prospectus released by the Romney campaign, which ignored Russia -- our so-called "number one geopolitical foe" -- for the first 34 pages.
But wait, there's more.
Heather Hurlburt, executive director of the National Security Network, published a good piece noting that yesterday's comments help show "how uncomfortable Romney is on national security issues."
Were I asked to choose America's number one geopolitical foe, I'd answer these questions:
1) Who has killed the most Americans in the past decade? (That would be nationalist and Islamist movements in countries we've invaded coming in at #1; Al Qaeda and its affiliates at #2; Iran at a distant #3 and perhaps even #4 behind nationalist and Islamist movements emanating from Pakistan.)
2) Who has the greatest ability to harm our economy and way of life -- the foundations of our strength? (China, no contest; then maybe the Saudis?)
3) Who has the greatest ability and shown the greatest willingness to frustrate our key geopolitical aims? (Given that Russia has gone along with some of our Iran sanctions, facilitated our continuing presence in Afghanistan, and avoided using its energy wealth to pressure our European allies during their economic weakness, I'd vote for either China or the emerging powers writ large here.)
4) Who has not just capabilities but intentions to foil continued progress toward a more integrated, more democratic, more free and prosperous (free civilly, socially and economically) world -- which is, ultimately, what most benefits the United States? (C'mon, the Russians are pikers in this category.)
In geopolitical terms, Russia has three things which pose significant problems for the US -- its energy, its nuclear weapons and its Security Council seat. Ironically, Mitt Romney is on record opposing just about everything we can do to reduce the salience of both.
I can appreciate why the Romney campaign would try to make Obama's "hot mic" story interesting, but the problem is the former governor just doesn't have any real policy chops in this area. He's out of his depth, and struggles when the subject takes center stage.
It's not just that Romney is uninformed; it's that he hasn't figured out how to fake it.
Leave a Comment:
Npw we know why Romney doesn't provide specifics on anything, ever. Here he gave his generic Obama slam, but merely naming a country made him look dumb.
He also sounds like Cain a little when it comes to foreign policy. He's going to let the Top Officials in the Military run the show. He'll listen to whatever they tell them and do what they say. So, are we going to have to rely on the judgment of our military forces if Romney were to become President? I don't like putting those two words together in a sentence. Foreign Relations is probably one of our top priorities. He has always worked with an attitude of coldness when it comes to diplomacy, I don't think he has any. He is proud of his work at Bain Capital, he is proud that he axed jobs. Will he be proud when he insults a world leader? He is already insulting to China.
"never seen anything quite as shabby, misleading and -- let's not mince words -- thoroughly ignorant..."
Words duly reflecting the possibility of this Republican candidates entire future presidency, wearily echoing the sentiments of another Republican presidency just passed. But let us not forget that undue influence aside, shabby, misleading, and ignorant is just what a considerable block of our nation's voters seem to want in charge of a Super Power nation. Everybody knows Anyone But Obama is such a well thought out political path to a better future for this country.
Complete nonsense. Every good ameriKKKan knows that diplomacy is for wimps. ameriKKKan presidents should dictate our will upon the rest of the world and whup their @sses with our military might if they resist.
Romney says it because "Russia" elicits the familiar Pavlovian frenzy in ill-informed conservatives who still operate under the assumption that it's 1962.
I've heard more conservative charges of "communism" this year than I've heard in the past two decades.
Not only is Mitt Romney ignorant on foreign policy issues, clearly he hasn't read much about the presidency.
As Juan Cole reminds us this morning, Bush The Elder went out of his way to let Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev know that he would not mean the hard line things he would say during the 1988 presidential campaign. Bush told Gorbachev that he would be talking that way because of who Bush called "intellectual thugs" in the Republican Party.
In other words, George H. W. Bush implicitly told Gorbachev that he would have more flexibility after the election – just as Pres. Obama did. MSNBC contributor and presidential historian Michael Beschloss wrote a book about the Bush presidency and quotes the former president as telling Gorbachev in 1987 that in the coming campaign he would say things that Gorbachev should ignore. He had to say tough things, Bush said, because of "the marginal intellectual thugs" surrounding President Reagan.
As Dr. Cole wrote, "some things don't change: The Soviet Union is gone but the marginal intellectual thugs are still around" and Mr. Romney is first in line.
Mitt knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy
" He's out of his depth, and struggles when the subject takes center stage."
That is equally applicable to domestic policy, tax policy, civil rights, the economy- and movie revues (he says he saw Hunger Games and dared to expound on it!)
Romney is still living in the 1950s. I don't think he knows the Cold War is over--like Dick Cheney hiding in his secret bunker issuing torture memos, surely wistfully recalling those days. Yes, a president Romney would be like Bush 2--thinking the presidency will be like a business where he can go in and throw around his weight and do whatever he wants because he is "the decider." We know how that turned out: we invaded a country(Iraq) that didn't attack us and fiddle dee farted around in Afghanistan NEVER catching bin Laden (Bush & Co were too busy counting their war profits). Bush with his fine business accumen bankrupted the government and destroyed the economy. He has wasted the energy and skill of our military in 2 long and worthless wars...need I continue?
Romney's question #1 "Who has killed the most Americans in the past decade." Americans murdered more Americans in 2010, which is more Americans than have been killed in both of GWB"s wars combined. #2 the GOP propose the greatest harm to our economy and way of life. #4 see #2.
I can't wait to hear Romney's position on Germany.
Romney is in over his head when it comes to foreign policy. He is inexperienced in handling situations that he cannot control. His management skills are of no use when dealing with people he cannot fire. This is what Obama/Dems should be saying during the elections.
Willard stands as all the proof necessary for my contention that there is absolutely no connection between the brain and the billfold. I'll even bet that the guys at Bain who created the policies that Willard didn't actually understand, that led to his wealth, were not compensated adequately for their knowledge, not being partners and all but mere employees. Willard just stood there and got stuffed with cash, like most Republican rich boys.
President Medvedev, said it best,"I would recommend all U.S. presidential candidates... to do two things. First, when phasing their position, one needs to use one's head, one's good reason, which would not do harm to a candidate. Also, (one needs to) look at his watch: We are in 2012 not the mid-1970s."
www.reuter.com/2012/03/27/us-russia-usa-medvedev-idUSBRE82Q0H020120327
Willard didn't do much to help himself with yesterday's comments as noted by Medvedev himself. As the Russian president indicates Romney sounds like he is still living in the 1970's and needs to use some of his brains rather then politicking:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/dmitry-medvedev-slams-romneys-anti-russia-comments-says-he-smells-of-hollywood/
As Tanya indicates above President Medvedev has weighted in and isn't impressed with Mr. Mitten's - " saying he should watch what he says. “Regarding ideological clichés, every time this or that side uses phrases like ‘enemy number one’, this always alarms me, this smells of Hollywood and certain times (of the past),”
Romney is looking sillier and sillier. Where did he get the idea that Russia is our number one geopolitical foe? Is Russia the new Bogey Man of the Neo-cons?
Republicans need a lot of Bogey Men. How else you going to scare the crap out of the rubes?
Romney's foreign policy utterances remind me of the Randy Newman song Political Science. Newman performed it not long ago on Colbert, and it should be available on YouTube. Check it out. Funny stuff, in a scary kind of way.
Steve, I came to the blog today with the specific intent to ask you to put together a list of Romney's cringe-worthy foreign policy utterances like you've done with Romney's lies. It looks like you're already off to a good start!!
Looked at from another angle, one could argue that Romney's reckless comments about Russia are just another prime example of his willingness to lie about anything consequences be damned if he thinks that it might give him a momentary politically edge. The fact that Romney's white paper doesn't get around to Russia until the end can be taken as proof that Romney is simply lying when he says that he believes that Russia is our #1 geopolitical foe - he is simply lying, as usual, in order to get in a momentary political cheap shot. Have we ever seen a major presidential contender who is this crass?
Nixon comes to mind - from Helen Gahagan Douglas to Checkers to Watergate and everything else in between.
In a surprising moment of candor for John Boehner:
Even President Medvedev had this to say:
Romney is just not prepared, qualified muchless ready for primetime.