By
Sir Ronald Sanders
BRIDGETOWN,
Barbados, Thursday October 18, 2012 - Such is the continuing power of the
United States that all over the world governments and organisations are
concerned about what a US Presidency of either incumbent Barack Obama or
hopeful Mitt Romney will mean to them.
After
four years as President, the world already knows what kind of foreign policy
Obama would seek to implement. It will
be forceful in defence of what Obama sees as the interests of the United
States, and while it will try to work with other governments and through the
United Nations Security Council, it will not stop short of taking unilateral
action against any country that it believes to pose a threat to the United
States. It will also continue to advance
a programme of promoting human rights and civil liberties in countries where it
is felt such rights and liberties are stifled and democracy is suppressed.
In
this regard, a new Obama administration will continue to take a tough line with
Iran for as long as it is convinced that the Iranian government is working
toward building a nuclear capability that could be used against Israel and
maybe further afield. Regrettably, it
will also continue its drone warfare in Pakistan and Afghanistan where hundreds
of innocent people are being killed as ‘collateral damage’ as the US government
hunts persons believed to be terrorists associated with al Qaida. Syria may also be ratcheted up the foreign
policy priorities as efforts intensify to bring an end to both the relentless
killing of civilians in clashes between the Assad regime and opposition forces,
and the burdensome flood of refugees to neighbouring states.
On
the global economic front, relations with China will continue to be a major
preoccupation as the US government tries to mitigate the challenges it faces
from what it portrays as China’s unfair trade advantages arising from
subsidised production and an undervalued currency. The Obama administration will undoubtedly
continue its strategy of negotiation with China and complaints to the dispute
settlement body of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
Mitt
Romney has given the world a flavour of the kind of foreign policy he will
pursue in several speeches he made during his campaign. There is no doubt that in Middle-East,
although he says he will “recommit America to the goal of a democratic,
prosperous Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the
Jewish state of Israel”, he will favour Israel’s interest above all
others. As he said, “the world must
never see any daylight between our two nations”. He will also militarise the
Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf Region by restoring the permanent presence
of aircraft carrier task forces, and he will be even tougher on Iran than Obama
has been by imposing new sanctions.
Further, he will challenge Russia by expanding the US’ military capacity
and he will seek to strengthen the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) so
that all of its 28 members devote 2 per cent of their GDP to security spending
(only 3 do so now).
With
regard to China, Romney has made it clear that on the trade front he will
“confront China’s cheating” and he will “maintain appropriate military
capabilities to discourage any aggressive or coercive behaviour by China
against its neighbours (including Taiwan)”.
The
choices, therefore, appear to be between the Romney method of a more
militaristic and aggressive US government globally that seeks to place American
power as the foundation of an international system, and the Obama approach that
will use American power to defend American interests but would be willing to
secure consensus as the basis for the functioning of the international order.
It
would seem that the world would be a less-confrontational place under Obama
than under Romney.
With
regard to the Caribbean, it is already known that the Obama Presidency has not
been helpful to the region and in some ways it has been harmful particularly in
the financial services sector, in climate change, and in a lack of
responsiveness to development needs. The
Caribbean’s financial services have been hurt both by the labelling of many of
them as “tax havens” and by the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)
which extends US jurisdiction into the Caribbean with a heavy compliance cost
to Caribbean financial institutions. It
is impacting government revenues and curtailing savings in banks by Caribbean
nationals who are also nationals or residents of the United States. On Climate
Change, during the Rio+20 Conference last June, the US refused to affirm an
earlier commitment to transfer technology to developing countries. It equally
refused to reaffirm any commitment to providing new and additional financial
resources.
Obama’s
help to the region has been primarily on curbing drug trafficking. But, this is as much – if not more - in
America’s interests as the region’s. The
focus on interdiction and not on providing resources for education, job
creation, and poverty alleviation is not tackling the region’s fundamental
problems.
Under
Romney, there is unlikely to be any change in the Obama policies toward the
Caribbean – except maybe in the strictures on the financial services sector,
since Romney himself is a beneficiary of financial vehicles in the Cayman
Islands.
Policies
toward Cuba and Venezuela would appear to be the biggest difference in policy
approaches between Obama and Romney.
Romney has made it clear that he will return to tight sanctions against
Cuba and he will not allow Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Castro’s Cuba to “lead a
virulently anti-American “Bolivarian” movement across Latin America that seeks
to undermine institutions of democratic governance and economic
opportunity”. He has also says he wants
“market based economic relationships”.
Against
this background, there is not much in the Presidency of Obama or Romney for the
Caribbean specifically. But the world
would be less contentious with America at least trying multilateral solutions
before unilateral coercion.
Read more: http://www.caribbean360.com/index.php/opinion/625213.html#ixzz29jr3eucn
No comments:
Post a Comment