Barack Obama's worldview

Yesterday, in the first of a series examining the foreign policy priorities of the main presidential candidates, we spotlighted John McCain.  Today it's Senator Barack Obama's turn.  Tomorrow Senator Hillary Clinton.  All of the posts are largely based on the candidates' contributions to Foreign Affairs magazine.  Senator Obama's full essay - Renewing American Leadership - can be read there.

There can be no understating of today's dangers: "This century's threats are at least as dangerous as and in some ways more complex than those we have confronted in the past. They come from weapons that can kill on a mass scale and from global terrorists who respond to alienation or perceived injustice with murderous nihilism. They come from rogue states allied to terrorists and from rising powers that could challenge both America and the international foundation of liberal democracy. They come from weak states that cannot control their territory or provide for their people. And they come from a warming planet that will spur new diseases, spawn more devastating natural disasters, and catalyze deadly conflicts."

Only a phased withdrawal will force the political solution that Iraq needs: "we cannot impose a military solution on a civil war between Sunni and Shiite factions. The best chance we have to leave Iraq a better place is to pressure these warring parties to find a lasting political solution. And the only effective way to apply this pressure is to begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces, with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008 -- a date consistent with the goal set by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. This redeployment could be temporarily suspended if the Iraqi government meets the security, political, and economic benchmarks to which it has committed. But we must recognize that, in the end, only Iraqi leaders can bring real peace and stability to their country."

>> Video: Unlike other Democrat hopefuls Obama opposed the Iraq war from the beginning but makes it clear that he's a hawk on terror generally and supported the Afghan campaign

>> Video: Obama and McCain differ on Iraq strategy

America must boldly lead a Middle East Peace Process: "For more than three decades, Israelis, Palestinians, Arab leaders, and the rest of the world have looked to America to lead the effort to build the road to a lasting peace. In recent years, they have all too often looked in vain. Our starting point must always be a clear and strong commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That commitment is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region -- a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. Now more than ever, we must strive to secure a lasting settlement of the conflict with two states living side by side in peace and security. To do so, we must help the Israelis identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability. Sustained American leadership for peace and security will require patient effort and the personal commitment of the president of the United States. That is a commitment I will make."

A radical Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons: "The world must work to stop Iran's uranium-enrichment program and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. It is far too dangerous to have nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical theocracy. At the same time, we must show Iran -- and especially the Iranian people -- what could be gained from fundamental change: economic engagement, security assurances, and diplomatic relations. Diplomacy combined with pressure could also reorient Syria away from its radical agenda to a more moderate stance -- which could, in turn, help stabilize Iraq, isolate Iran, free Lebanon from Damascus' grip, and better secure Israel."

>> Video: Democrat presidential candidates discuss Iran

America needs a bigger, more expert military: "We should expand our ground forces by adding 65,000 soldiers to the army and 27,000 marines. Bolstering these forces is about more than meeting quotas. We must recruit the very best and invest in their capacity to succeed. That means providing our servicemen and servicewomen with first-rate equipment, armor, incentives, and training -- including in foreign languages and other critical skills."

We must engage with Russia on nuclear proliferation: "Although we must not shy away from pushing for more democracy and accountability in Russia, we must work with the country in areas of common interest -- above all, in making sure that nuclear weapons and material are secure. We must also work with Russia to update and scale back our dangerously outdated Cold War nuclear postures and de-emphasize the role of nuclear weapons. America must not rush to produce a new generation of nuclear warheads. And we should take advantage of recent technological advances to build bipartisan consensus behind ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. All of this can be done while maintaining a strong nuclear deterrent. These steps will ultimately strengthen, not weaken, our security."

Pakistan must do more to combat the Taliban: "I will join with our allies in insisting -- not simply requesting -- that Pakistan crack down on the Taliban, pursue Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, and end its relationship with all terrorist groups. At the same time, I will encourage dialogue between Pakistan and India to work toward resolving their dispute over Kashmir and between Afghanistan and Pakistan to resolve their historic differences and develop the Pashtun border region. If Pakistan can look toward the east with greater confidence, it will be less likely to believe that its interests are best advanced through cooperation with the Taliban.  Although vigorous action in South Asia and Central Asia should be a starting point, our efforts must be broader. There must be no safe haven for those who plot to kill Americans. To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military and twenty-first-century partnerships as strong as the anticommunist alliance that won the Cold War to stay on the offense everywhere from Djibouti to Kandahar."

>> The Wall Street Journal dubbed Senator Obama a "neocon" after remarks on Pakistan

>> Obama's 'get tough with Pakistan' remarks look set to backfire

America must rededicate itself to the United Nations' mission: "The UN Secretariat's management practices remain weak. Peacekeeping operations are overextended. The new UN Human Rights Council has passed eight resolutions condemning Israel -- but not a single resolution condemning the genocide in Darfur or human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. Yet none of these problems will be solved unless America rededicates itself to the organization and its mission."

America must lead in combating climate change: "Strengthened institutions and invigorated alliances and partnerships are especially crucial if we are to defeat the epochal, man-made threat to the planet: climate change. Without dramatic changes, rising sea levels will flood coastal regions around the world, including much of the eastern seaboard. Warmer temperatures and declining rainfall will reduce crop yields, increasing conflict, famine, disease, and poverty. By 2050, famine could displace more than 250 million people worldwide. That means increased instability in some of the most volatile parts of the world.  As the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases, America has the responsibility to lead. While many of our industrial partners are working hard to reduce their emissions, we are increasing ours at a steady clip -- by more than ten percent per decade. As president, I intend to enact a cap-and-trade system that will dramatically reduce our carbon emissions. And I will work to finally free America of its dependence on foreign oil -- by using energy more efficiently in our cars, factories, and homes, relying more on renewable sources of electricity, and harnessing the potential of biofuels."

Aid spending must be doubled: "As president, I will double our annual investment in meeting these challenges to $50 billion by 2012 and ensure that those new resources are directed toward worthwhile goals. For the last 20 years, U.S. foreign assistance funding has done little more than keep pace with inflation. It is in our national security interest to do better. But if America is going to help others build more just and secure societies, our trade deals, debt relief, and foreign aid must not come as blank checks. I will couple our support with an insistent call for reform, to combat the corruption that rots societies and governments from within. I will do so not in the spirit of a patron but in the spirit of a partner -- a partner mindful of his own imperfections."

>> Video of Barack Obama setting out his overall foreign policy goals: 'I reject the notion that America's time has passed'

Comments

[Richard]

"Aid expenditure must be doubled"

Why does nobody make the case for giving individual American citizens the choice of whether or not they wish to give more in foreign aid? If people believe donating large sums of money is a good thing then they don't need the government to do it for them. If they believe it's a bad thing then the government shouldn't do it.

[Tony Makara]

As ever Barack Obama gets by with wide sweeping statements that sound sensible but on closer examination are not as straightforward as first appear. I do not rate Obama. He is naive and seems to believe that throwing money at a problem will solve it and that foreign policy is merely a matter of good faith. He is big on big statements but small on the small print. Barack Obama is not on the same level as Edwards or Clinton.

[timelord]

Obama should be the first choice for us Conservatives. He showed great leadership and judgement in opposing Iraq (unlike myself). He is making all the right noises on the Middle East, Iran, Pakistan, terrorism and climate change. And, lastly as a bonus, a black President will do more to show the real face of modern America to the world, than any other candidate.

[atheliing]

Obama is a junior senator with no experience.

He wants to throw more money away and give up national sovereignty to a worthless, corrupt United Nations.

No thank you.

[James]

He showed great leadership and judgement in opposing Iraq (unlike myself).

Given that Senator Obama was only elected to the Senate in 2004, his oft repeated cry that he never voted for the war in Iraq rings somewhat hollow. Of course he never voted for it. He never had the chance.

[Richard]

"And, lastly as a bonus, a black President will do more to show the real face of modern America to the world, than any other candidate."

Unless I'm mistaken I thought it was the Hispanics who were on the increase?

[Tony Makara]

Why does race have to come into this at all? In the 21st century we should be moving away from the idea of blacks voting for a black guy because he is black. Its ridiculous! Look a what the candidate stands for and his/her ability to be president. In Britain the Labour party believe that every black vote belongs to them, almost as if they own the black vote. Its time that race was factored out of elections and people started voting for the policy and the person putting it across.

[atheliing]

I agree, Tony, the race factor shouldn't be a factor at all. Anyone who votes because of race is a racist, pure and simple.

[Maduka]

Obama represents something new. He is not running as a black candidate (like Al and Jesse). He is running as an American candidate.

Most of Obama's support comes from white Americans.

What you might not have noticed is that both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are lukewarm to the prospects of an Obama candidancy. They feel comfortable with Hillary who represents the same old politics of pandering (on which their relevance rests).

Obama may not win the Democratic nomination, but that young man will break the stranglehold the "civil rights" industry has on black leadership.

He is important. He will pave the way for "conservative Obamas".

[Denise]

Tony, you make an excellent point. Politicians make the same mistake regarding women. They seem to think that a female candidate will get all of women's votes. Many of them are talking about how Hillary will get all the women's votes. But she won't have mine. I vote for who I think can run the country as I see fit, not for their gender. For politicians to assume such things shows how they often insult our intelligence. Didn't the Tory party make the claim that the reason they didn't win the election was because they didn't have a female candidate to get women's votes? I could have sworn I heard that somewhere. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

[timelord]

James - (1) You don't have to be a Senator to have a view on Iraq, (2) there have been numerous votes related to Iraq (expenditure) since 2004.

Richard - perhaps you can tell us all which Hispanic candidate you have in mind?

Race should not be a factor. But it is. We live in the real world. Do you think an Arab Israeli can be elected PM of Israel, without race being a factor?

[Credit help]

This is such an important topic, thank you so much for sharing.

[dental care]

si tuviera una duda con respecto a estre sitio donde podria contactarlos para aclararla? o igual me contestan por medio del blog?

[rc helicopter reviews]

Impressive blog! -Arron