(MintPress) – Foreign policy has become a wedge issue in the Republican Party, and on both ends of the spectrum looking toward the middle are Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. The contrast in policies between the two presidential candidates comes during a time when Iran has become the focal point of foreign issues during this election cycle, but also during a period when the U.S. is winding down a war in Iraq and continuing a war in Afghanistan.
American foreign policy has resulted in military deployments to currently more than 150 countries around the world, with more than 205,000 active-duty personnel serving outside the U.S. or its territories. Many of the personnel remain in countries with which the U.S. had conflict with decades ago. Currently, there are nearly 40,000 military personnel in Japan and 10,000 in the United Kingdom.
Whether this level of military installation and involvement is sustained or grown could be answered by who the Republican Party selects to represent it during this year’s presidential election and whether that candidate wins the November vote.
.
Ron Paul – The Non-Interventionist
Paul approaches foreign policy with his libertarian viewpoints and non-interventionist stance, saying the United States should not be meddling in the affairs of other countries. Paul says we needlessly put our troops in harm’s way and waste the money of taxpayers on wars with no objectives.
“There’s nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today … we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours,” Paul has said in the past. “And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we’re acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons.”
To clarify, Paul is not against military intervention. His campaign website says Paul would “only send our military into conflict with a clear mission and all the tools they need to complete the job – and then bring them home.” He also would improve on ensuring military veterans receive health care, benefits and honors they are promised when they return home. Recently, some have argued that returning veterans deserve more of a celebratory welcome home and appreciation.
Paul says his foreign policy is to simply treat all nations as equals, even though the U.S. has a varying degree of interaction with nations around the globe. When it comes to hot button issues, Paul stands his ground. Paul has said he would cut foreign aid to Israel, and every country abroad for that manner.
“To me, foreign aid is taking money from poor people in this country and giving it to rich people in poor countries, and it becomes weapons of war,” Paul said at a debate.
Paul explains that by treating every other country as an equal, there would no longer be a conflict of interest with which countries get foreign aid and how much each country gets.
“Stop and consider America’s policy,” Paul said. “We give $3 billion a year to Israel in loans; and we give $12 billion or more in assistance to Israel’s self-declared enemies. Some of these are countries that say they will drive Israel into the sea.”
Paul has faced criticism for this stance, particularly from the crowd in support for the current Arab Spring movements. By expressing and offering no support for those protesting against corruption within their leadership, critics say the U.S. would not be encouraging democracy and would only make it harder for democracy to thrive in regions struggling through dictatorships. Much of the foreign aid countries receive from the U.S. goes toward creating civil societies by creating non-profit organizations and health care groups.
Paul’s foreign policy and troop support was celebrated at a rally in Washington D.C. on Tuesday, as veterans marched outside the White House against President Barack Obama’s foreign policy and gave their support to Paul as the Republican presidential nominee.
“It seems very clear to me that those of us who are willing to put our lives on the line to defend this country want a commander in chief who is going to be decisive, who’s going to put America’s security interests first, and who’s only going to send us into harm’s way with a clear mission,” said Adam Kokesh, founder of Veterans for Ron Paul 2012 and a veteran of the Iraq war at the rally. “Ron Paul is the only candidate that comes close to measuring up to that standard.”
During a debate in Florida, Paul expressed the need to reach out to countries thought to be hostile, such as Cuba. He said rebuilding ties through trade and not military, political and financial means will only weaken any potential bond between the two countries.
“I think free trade is the answer. Free trade is the answer to a lot of conflicts around the world. And you might add Cuba too. I think we’d be a lot better off trading with Cuba. But as far as us having a military or financial obligation to go down and dictate what government they should have? I don’t like that idea,” Paul said. “I would support the people by encouraging free trade and trying to set a standard that countries in Central and South America – or anywhere in the world – would want to emulate.”
.
Rick Santorum – The war on ‘Islamic fascism’
Santorum has shied away from indulging too much into foreign policy, instead running a campaign on social issues, faith and family values. However, that hasn’t stopped him from injecting his ideologies on foreign affairs should he become Commander in Chief.
Unlike Paul, Santorum has supported the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and believes there is a clear objective to obtain in order to declare victory. Santorum’s foreign policy, however, is largely built around the threat of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon and what he calls ‘Islamic fascism’ – his notion that radical Islam is the biggest threat to the Western world.
In regards to radical Islam, Santorum said there is a need to “evangelize” and “eradicate” parts of the Middle East. Santorum even has an entire page on his campaign website dedicated to how he would deal with Iran.
Santorum’s focus on Iran has even left him warning North Dakota about the threat they face from an Iranian attack. He has also done the same thing in Florida, Missouri and South Carolina.
Santorum has come out and said that he would bomb Iran’s nuclear sites unless Iran opened them up for international arms inspectors. He has also speculated that Iran has the capacity to create an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) – a detonation of a nuclear warhead within the atmosphere, which, in theory, would produce enough electromagnetic energy to destroy America’s power grid.
In January, on “Meet the Press,” Santorum made it clear that he would target anyone bolstering Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
“I will say to any foreign scientist that’s going into Iran to help on their [nuclear] program, you will be treated like an enemy combatant, like an al-Qaida member,” he said.
“I have said time and time again across Pennsylvania these past weeks that the fight against Islamic fascism is the great test of our generation,” Santorum wrote in 2006. “Leaders are obliged to articulate this threat and to propose what is necessary to defeat it. That is my purpose, and our national calling.”
While Paul would look to pull troops out of the Middle East and engage in diplomatic talks, Santorum feels as though he has identified the enemy and is willing to combat it head-on.
In Israel, Santorum has said he would help the country work toward a one-state solution, as he believes there is not a ‘Palestinian’ people. Santorum has vocalized being for Israel keeping the settlements they have already established in the West Bank because they are all of the same mold. “All the people that live in the West Bank are Israelis, they’re not Palestinians,” Sanotrum said.
When is comes to the Arab Spring movement, Santorum has offered a mixed message. He has vocalized support for portions of the movement, but has also warned against what it could become in the future.
“As always, America needs to keep a watchful eye on Iran – especially the growing alliances between key Muslim countries,” Santorum said. “While democracy is generally good, these ‘democratic revolutions’ could easily turn sour and ultimately lead to the caliphate; so ‘beware the revolutions.’”