Warrior McCain, Diplomat Obama

Friday's debate in Mississippi showed the different approaches that John McCain and Barack Obama will bring to foreign policy, including specifically to Middle East issues. More than half the 90 minutes of the "foreign policy debate" was taken up with discussion about the U.S.-global financial crisis, so moderator Jim Lehrer didn't get around to asking about some key matters. There was nothing at all about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or Arab world reform, and Lehrer did not ask either candidate whether they envisioned a U.S. attack on Iran during their presidency.

Both candidates came off as presidential, something of an advantage for the much younger, less experienced Obama, who had been cast even by Democratic challengers like Hillary Clinton as too green for the big job. Obama showed himself to be a strategic thinker, a well-informed, thoughtful and cool realist and a leader who is able to communicate to Americans and the world. In repeatedly saying, "What Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand," McCain threw Obama off balance a few times. McCain showed off his experience to good effect, repeatedly referencing his first-hand knowledge of geography, statesmen and international developments, dating back four decades to the Vietnam War when Obama was literally still a kid. For the "old hand" in foreign policy, however, McCain had surprising difficulty with the names of some of the key leaders. He stuttered and mangled his way through Ahmadinejad--which even the experience-challenged Sarah Palin now throws around like a Middle East scholar--and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari became "Kardari."

McCain came off as the big-talking promoter of a muscular America, ticking off promises to achieve military victory in Iraq and equal success against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, rebuking Russia's Vladimir Putin for running a KGB state and ridiculing Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for calling Israel a "stinking corpse." McCain repeatedly hailed Gen. David Petraeus as the savior of Iraq--mentioning Petraeus by name eight times, while referring to his actual running mate only once, as "a partner that's a good maverick"-- and gloried in recounting his visits with American troops in Iraq. McCain showed his nuanced side of foreign policy by noting that he had opposed President Reagan's ill-fated military intervention in Lebanon in 1982, and how despite being a POW in Hanoi he worked to normalize U.S. relations with Vietnam after the war.

In contrast, Obama represented quieter American strength, underlined the virtues of diplomacy, eschewed personal attacks on foreign leaders, and spoke of the need for America to regain its moral standing in the world. He talked about using U.S. forces "wisely," saying the McCain-supported Bush administration focus on Iraq detracted from the main task of killing al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. Obama was at pains to show he's no wimp. He labeled Iran a "rogue state" and took a jab at a Pakistani dictator that could have applied to Middle East allies like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan as well: "We had a 20th-century mindset that basically said, 'Well, you know, he may be a dictator, but he's our dictator.'"

The debate highlighted the specific differences between the candidates on the Middle East issues of Iraq, Iran and terrorism, but there was nothing new in what they had to say.

On Iraq:

Obama scored by pointing out that the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was a test of leadership--one that Obama won, by correctly predicting the negative consequences and opposing the war, and McCain lost, by doing the opposite. McCain tried to deflect the judgement issue, saying, "The next president of the United States is not going to have to address the issue as to whether we went into Iraq or not. The next president of the United States is going to have to decide how we leave, when we leave, and what we leave behind."

McCain sounded euphoric in hailing the "victory" that the U.S. is "winning" in Iraq. He framed the war in terms of American "honor" and U.S. security interests. He indicated that the victory will result in Iraq becoming a fledgling, stable democracy with less sectarian violence, a U.S. ally, and a country with decreased Iranian influence. In contrast, Obama was sober, as well as vague, about Iraq's prospects. At one point, saying America should "give Iraq back its country," he even seemed to agree with some war critics that U.S. troops are, at least in part, part of the problem.

While the success of the U.S. military "surge" has decreased violence in Iraq for the time being, McCain's rosy scenario is unjustified and, intentionally or not, is misleading. Iraq is years, perhaps decades, away from becoming either stable or democratic. While sectarianism is a historical problem in Iraq, the U.S. invasion itself enabled al-Qaeda extremists to enter Iraq and exacerbate it through murderous attacks on Iraqi Shi'ites. Iranian influence is pervasive in Iraq and will remain so while the U.S. stays in Iraq and after it exits. Obama was not pushed to explain the possible backlash in Iraq to his plan to "end this war responsibly" with a phased withdrawal of American forces over 16 months, or what he would do if an orderly pullout could not be achieved in that time frame.

On Iran:

Both candidates saw a nuclear-armed Iran as a serious threat to global stability. One of the starkest foreign policy differences between them is Obama's emphasis on seeking to end the crisis with Iran through negotiations rather than through pressure alone.

Obama's statement: "We are also going to have to, I believe, engage in tough direct diplomacy with Iran and this is a major difference I have with Senator McCain, this notion by not talking to people we are punishing them has not worked. It has not worked in Iran, it has not worked in North Korea. In each instance, our efforts of isolation have actually accelerated their efforts to get nuclear weapons. That will change when I'm president of the United States."

Obama, however, was not pushed to explain how he envisioned negotiations with Iran--whether he would seek a Grand Bargain that included normal relations or not, what demands he would make on the Iranians during the talks, etc. Obama made the excellent point that in the event negotiations failed, the U.S. would have enhanced it's moral leverage over Russia and China in seeking their crucial cooperation in imposing meaningful sanctions. Neither candidate was asked under what circumstances they would consider a military attack on Iran to destroy its nuclear program. McCain reiterated his policy of stiffening sanctions on Iran. He insisted that this could be done effectively without the help of Russia or China, but was not pushed to explain why the Bush administration had failed to succeed in that case. Despite his lack of interest in pushing diplomacy with Tehran, and although he called a nuclear-armed Iran "an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region," McCain did not advocate using military force against Iran.

McCain flip-flopped and seemed confused on the issue of diplomacy and Iran. He pooh-poohed Obama, suggesting that he would naively start out with a meeting with somebody like Ahmadinejad without advance preparations. He also seemed to ridicule the results of Bush's about-face on nuclear negotiations with North Korea. Then he said he "always encouraged" diplomatic meetings with the Iranians by the U.S. secretary of state and lower-level officials, and that talks with North Korea were okay as long as U.S. diplomats "trust but verify."

Perhaps the clearest, most important difference was not over any policy like Iraq or Iran, but in the emotional templates of the candidates. McCain showed himself to be more of an emotional patriot, Obama more a cerebral realist. McCain mentioned "victory" or "winning" in Iraq nine times, and made references to "honor" or the agony of defeat 17 more times, whereas Obama limited himself in the patriotic buzz word competition to saying "nobody is talking about defeat in Iraq."

The statement that best reflected McCain's foreign policy mindset:

I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm's way. And I'll tell you, I had a town hall meeting in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire, and a woman stood up and she said, "Senator McCain, I want you to do me the honor of wearing a bracelet with my son's name on it." He was 22 years old and he was killed in combat outside of Baghdad, Matthew Stanley, before Christmas last year... And I said, "I will -- I will wear his bracelet with honor." ...And then she said, "But, Senator McCain, I want you to do everything -- promise me one thing, that you'll do everything in your power to make sure that my son's death was not in vain." That means that that mission succeeds... A [Vietnam] war that I was in, where we had an Army, that it wasn't through any fault of their own, but they were defeated. And I know how hard it is for that -- for an Army and a military to recover from that. And it did and we will win this one and we won't come home in defeat and dishonor and probably have to go back if we fail.

Perhaps Obama's most emblematic comment was:

It is important for us to understand that the way we are perceived in the world is going to make a difference, in terms of our capacity to get cooperation and root out terrorism. And one of the things that I intend to do as president is to restore America's standing in the world. We are less respected now than we were eight years ago or even four years ago. And this is the greatest country on Earth. But because of some of the mistakes that have been made -- and I give Senator McCain great credit on the torture issue, for having identified that as something that undermines our long-term security -- because of those things, we, I think, are going to have a lot of work to do in the next administration to restore that sense that America is that shining beacon on a hill.

--By Scott MacLeod/Cairo