WASHINGTON (EJP)---In less than three months, Americans will elect either Sen. Barack Hussein Obama or Sen. John Sidney McCain as the new White House occupant.
The world watches as each candidate's position get a closer look to what defines positions, toward Israel, the Middle East and Europe become clearer and more distinct, even as each candidate takes into consideration the heritage left by the current President.
President Georges W. Bush has been outspoken in defending Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, affirming Israel as America's first ally in the Middle East, and challenging the Iranian nuclear program. Will the next president?
| |
|
Sen.Barack Obama at the Western Wall in Jerusalem during his visit to Israel earlier this year.
|
Indeed, while both candidates declare that the alliance with Israel constitutes the unshakable basis of the American geopolitical approach in the Middle East, they diverge on the Israeli settlements, the borders of a potential future Palestinian state and the fight against terrorism in the region.
While Obama seems likely to return United States to a more “traditional” role of "honest broker" in the region, McCain sees fighting Islamic extremists as imperative.
This means that regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, although both share the idea that it remains an Anerican national security issue, McCain challenges Obama's analysis.
The Democratic candidate believes that the conflict engenders radical Islam:"It is an open wound and an open sore that infects all of our foreign policy,” he declared, adding that "its lack of resolution provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions".
This formulation suggests heavy Israeli concessions are necessary to achieve peace at any cost.
| |
|
Barack Obama said Republican "tough talk" was not protecting Israel.
In his speech accepting the Democratic Party's presidential nomination Thursday night in Denver, Obama derided the Bush administration and his Republican rival Sen. John McCain for failing to contain terrorism. "You don't defeat a terrorist network that operates in eighty countries by occupying Iraq," he said. "You don't protect Israel and deter Iran just by talking tough in Washington.
|
On the other hand, McCain argues that: "Were the Israeli-Palestinian issue resolved tomorrow, we would still face the enormous threat of radical Islamic extremism", thereby emphasizing that radical Islam is the obstacle to peace not the consequence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The Iranian nuclear threat has also evoked different responses from the two candidates. Obama is willing to engage direct talks with Iranian leaders without precondition despite the sanctions imposed by the international community.
This attitude has widely been criticized by some European countries that always emphasized the necessity of Iran halting its nuclear program prior to engaging such talks.
| |
|
Sen. John McCain visits the Western Wall in Jerusalem during a visit to Israel earlier this year.
|
McCain firmly criticized Obama's strategy and argued that no concessions should be made: "working with our European and regional allies is the best way to meet the threat posed by Iran, not unilateral concessions that undermine multilateral diplomacy".
Regarding the US ties with Europe, both candidates seem willing to revitalize the transatlantic relations, giving Europe a large place at the strategic table.
According to Joseph Joffe, expert on transatlantic relations, whether McCain or Obama wins, the 44th president will speak more politely than Georges Bush in his first term.
“He will also pay more attention to the decent opinions of mankind. But he will still preside over the world's largest military, economic, and cultural power which should make us cognizant of the fact that both candidates will have to deal on the international issues as the leader of a superpower. Reality is non-negotiable.”
