As Senator McCain begins to reintroduce himself to the American public via biographical advertisements and his recent tour of military landmarks connected to his life, serious questions remain unasked pertaining to his suitability for the position of Commander-in-Chief. Does this war hero have the knowledge, analytical skills and judgment to be President at this time in our nation´s history?
To date, these questions, which are often whispered in foreign policy and media circles, are not a part of the discourse because those who believe they should be raised have held back out of respect for the Senator´s heroic service, or a fear of being falsely accused of asking questions simply to sully his reputation.
Unfortunately, the continued failure to ask serious questions about Senator McCain´s ability to assume the role of Commander-in-Chief fosters an environment where genuine debate is stifled in the most important national security election in a generation.
The national security challenges facing the United States are immense. The next President will inherit more than two badly managed wars - Iraq and Afghanistan - and an incoherent approach to combating the al-Qaeda network. He or she will come to office and have to develop a comprehensive national security doctrine capable of addressing a plethora of challenges ranging from instability in the Middle East and South Asia to a rising Russia and China. Additionally, the next President will have to tackle the asymmetrical threats of terrorism and nuclear proliferation, the challenges of climate change, the dangers of resource wars, and an international community doubting American sincerity at a time when global cooperation is needed more than ever before.
To date, we do not know whether Senator McCain is equipped to tackle these national security challenges. We know that Senator McCain is a war hero and we know that he has personally sacrificed on behalf of his country. We also know that he is part of a proud military family that honors service and duty. However, unless foreign policy experts and the media push the national security debate outside the comfort zone of the current biographical analysis of the Senator, we will not know if he is equipped for the role of Commander-in-Chief.
That is the overall question that needs to be asked and answered over the course of the coming months. But to arrive at this answer will not be easy. A range of critical questions need to be asked of the Senator (and in time his Democratic opponent). The answers to these questions will, collectively, tell us more about his suitability to act as the Commander-in-Chief than all the biographical data on record. The list of questions posed to the Senator could include the following:
1. Knowing what you know now - that the Iraqi government did not have weapons of mass destruction - would you still have voted to authorize the war?
2. Can the U.S. legitimately remain in Iraq if seven in ten Iraqis (according to a World Public Opinion Poll from 2006) would like their government to ask for U.S.–led forces to be withdrawn within a year? In the face of such data is it wise for the U.S. to contemplate remaining in Iraq for 100 years?
3. After the unilateralism of the Bush administration, will you seek to reengage the international community on global challenges ranging from climate change to nuclear proliferation? How will you seek to overcome the resentments that may have built up in recent years?
4. The United Nations is supporting U.S. policy interests in a number of different spheres ranging from the Afghanistan mission to non-proliferation efforts to counter-terror coordination. How do you reconcile your endorsement of a "League of Democracies" with the need to strengthen and support the United Nations and its ongoing work?
5. Do you endorse the George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger and Sam Nunn plan to rid the world of nuclear weapons? If so will you make this goal a cornerstone of your national security agenda?
There are many other critical questions that could and should be posed to the Senator. It is vital that foreign policy experts and the media fully engage the national security debate and ask him the tough questions designed to establish whether this particular hero of the Vietnam War is, in fact, suited to hold the office of Commander-in-Chief at the dawn of the 21st Century.
To date, these questions, which are often whispered in foreign policy and media circles, are not a part of the discourse because those who believe they should be raised have held back out of respect for the Senator´s heroic service, or a fear of being falsely accused of asking questions simply to sully his reputation.
Unfortunately, the continued failure to ask serious questions about Senator McCain´s ability to assume the role of Commander-in-Chief fosters an environment where genuine debate is stifled in the most important national security election in a generation.
The national security challenges facing the United States are immense. The next President will inherit more than two badly managed wars - Iraq and Afghanistan - and an incoherent approach to combating the al-Qaeda network. He or she will come to office and have to develop a comprehensive national security doctrine capable of addressing a plethora of challenges ranging from instability in the Middle East and South Asia to a rising Russia and China. Additionally, the next President will have to tackle the asymmetrical threats of terrorism and nuclear proliferation, the challenges of climate change, the dangers of resource wars, and an international community doubting American sincerity at a time when global cooperation is needed more than ever before.
To date, we do not know whether Senator McCain is equipped to tackle these national security challenges. We know that Senator McCain is a war hero and we know that he has personally sacrificed on behalf of his country. We also know that he is part of a proud military family that honors service and duty. However, unless foreign policy experts and the media push the national security debate outside the comfort zone of the current biographical analysis of the Senator, we will not know if he is equipped for the role of Commander-in-Chief.
That is the overall question that needs to be asked and answered over the course of the coming months. But to arrive at this answer will not be easy. A range of critical questions need to be asked of the Senator (and in time his Democratic opponent). The answers to these questions will, collectively, tell us more about his suitability to act as the Commander-in-Chief than all the biographical data on record. The list of questions posed to the Senator could include the following:
1. Knowing what you know now - that the Iraqi government did not have weapons of mass destruction - would you still have voted to authorize the war?
2. Can the U.S. legitimately remain in Iraq if seven in ten Iraqis (according to a World Public Opinion Poll from 2006) would like their government to ask for U.S.–led forces to be withdrawn within a year? In the face of such data is it wise for the U.S. to contemplate remaining in Iraq for 100 years?
3. After the unilateralism of the Bush administration, will you seek to reengage the international community on global challenges ranging from climate change to nuclear proliferation? How will you seek to overcome the resentments that may have built up in recent years?
4. The United Nations is supporting U.S. policy interests in a number of different spheres ranging from the Afghanistan mission to non-proliferation efforts to counter-terror coordination. How do you reconcile your endorsement of a "League of Democracies" with the need to strengthen and support the United Nations and its ongoing work?
5. Do you endorse the George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger and Sam Nunn plan to rid the world of nuclear weapons? If so will you make this goal a cornerstone of your national security agenda?
There are many other critical questions that could and should be posed to the Senator. It is vital that foreign policy experts and the media fully engage the national security debate and ask him the tough questions designed to establish whether this particular hero of the Vietnam War is, in fact, suited to hold the office of Commander-in-Chief at the dawn of the 21st Century.
