This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
BOCA RATON, Fla. — President Obama and Mitt Romney wrapped up a series of debates on Monday night with a bristling exchange over America’s place in the world as each sought to portray the other as an unreliable commander in chief in a dangerous era.
BOCA RATON, Fla. — President Obama and Mitt Romney wrapped up a series of defining debates on Monday night with a bristling exchange over America’s place in the world as each sought to portray the other as an unreliable commander in chief in a dangerous era.
Mr. Obama picked up right where he had left off in last week’s debate, going on the offensive from the very start and accusing his challenger of articulating an incoherent foreign policy. Mr. Romney opened less aggressively but accused the president of failing to adequately assert American interests and values, particularly in Libya, where an attack last month killed the American ambassador.
Picking up where he left off in last week’s debate, Mr. Obama went on offense from the start, lacerating his challenger for articulating a set of “wrong and reckless” policies that he called incoherent. While less aggressive, Mr. Romney pressed back, accusing the president of failing to assert American interests and values in the world to deal with a “rising tide of chaos.”
What America needed, Mr. Obama said within minutes of the debate’s opening at Lynn University here, is “strong steady leadership, not wrong and reckless leadership that’s all over the map.”
“Governor, the problem is that on a whole range of issues, whether it’s the Middle East, whether it’s Afghanistan, whether it’s Iraq, whether it’s now Iran, you’ve been all over the map,” Mr. Obama charged.
Mr. Romney countered by calling the president counterproductive and interested only in scoring political points. “Attacking me is not an agenda,” he said. “Attacking me is not talking about how we’re going to deal with the challenges that exist in the Middle East.”
“I don’t see our influence growing around the world,” Mr. Romney countered. “I see our influence receding, in part because of the failure of the president to deal with our economic challenges at home.”
The debate, dedicated to foreign policy, was the last opportunity for the candidates to face each other directly before the Nov. 6 election. While international relations have often taken a back seat to the economy and domestic issues during the marathon campaign, whoever wins in two weeks will inherit a world with increasingly complicated challenges, from the tumult in the Middle East to a resurgent Russia to an emerging China.
The debate here at Lynn University, moderated by Bob Schieffer of CBS News, was dedicated to foreign policy even though it veered occasionally into domestic issues, and presented the last opportunity for the candidates to face each other before the Nov. 6 election. While international relations have often taken a back seat to the economy during the marathon campaign, whoever wins in two weeks will inherit a world with increasingly complicated challenges, from the turmoil in the Middle East to a resurgent Russia to an emerging China, and Monday’s debate highlighted the vexing issues ahead.
Mr. Romney opened the debate with praise for the president for the killing of Osama bin Laden but quickly pivoted to say a broader strategy was needed to address the “rising tide of chaos” in the Middle East. “I congratulate him on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in Al Qaeda,” he said, “but we can’t kill our way out of this mess.”
For all its fireworks, the debate broke little new ground and underscored that the differences between the two men on foreign policy rest more on tone, style and their sense of leadership than on particular policies. Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney seemed to align on matters like withdrawing from Afghanistan, the perils of intervening in Syria and the use of drones to battle terrorists.
Mr. Obama quickly went on the offense. “I have to tell you that your strategy previously has been one which has been all over the map,” he told Mr. Romney, facing him directly.
While they varied in degree, the heart of their clash rested on who would pursue the same national goals more effectively and ensure America’s enduring economic and security role overseas.
Chopping the air with his hand, Mr. Obama came armed with a host of zingers, at times lecturing and even mocking Mr. Romney on the details of certain policies, hoping to expose his challenger as an uninformed pretender at the risk of coming across himself as condescending. Mr. Romney sat stiffly, his hands before him, back ramrod.
At one point, when Mr. Romney complained that the Navy “is smaller now than any time since 1917,” Mr. Obama pounced and noted that the comparison works only if aircraft carriers are equated with gunboats. “We also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military has changed,” the president said.
Slowing his words, he added sarcastically: “We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go under water, nuclear submarines.” The issue, he said, “is not a game of Battleship, where we are counting ships.”
The enmity between the men surfaced again and again, and the president seemed to have studied each attack line that Mr. Romney had used in the past, in case he used it again, like his oft-repeated criticism of Mr. Obama’s supposed “apology tour” of the world. “You said that on occasion America had dictated to other nations,” Mr. Romney said. “Mr. President, America has not dictated to other nations. We have freed other nations from dictators.”
Mr. Obama hit back fast. “If we’re going to talk about trips we’ve taken,” he said before pausing dramatically, in a reference to Mr. Romney’s foreign trip this summer, when he was widely derided for insulting Britain’s ability to host the Olympic Games and for holding fund-raisers in London and in Israel. “When I was a candidate for office, the first trip I took was to visit our troops,” he continued. “And when I went to Israel as a candidate, I didn’t take donors. I didn’t attend fund-raisers.”
Mr. Romney pinned the cascading crises around the world on Mr. Obama’s shoulders, saying the president had failed to live up to his promises from his 2008 campaign and left the country in a weaker position.
“Look at the record,” Mr. Romney said. “You look at the record of the last four years and say: Is Iran closer to a bomb? Yes. Is the Middle East in tumult? Yes. Is Al Qaeda on the run, on its heels? No. Are Israel and the Palestinians closer to reaching a peace agreement? No.”
He sought to use the words of the Iranian leader, a hard-line Islamist who considers the United States the “Great Satan,” to bolster his argument that the United States has become weak. “When the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says our debt makes us not a strong country, that’s a frightening thing,” Mr. Romney said.
The subject of Iran’s nuclear program came up repeatedly during the debate, and both men talked tough, at one point seeming to compete with each other to show how much they are in the corner of Israel, which considers a nuclear Iran a threat to its existence.
“As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Obama said. He cited international sanctions as having brought the Iranian economy to its knees. Mr. Romney said Mr. Obama had allowed “daylight” to show between the United States and Israel and vowed to tighten sanctions and seek a war crimes indictment against Mr. Ahmadinejad for inciting genocide against Israel.
But at the end of the night, for all the sound and fury on Iran, there was little substantive difference between the candidates. Both are in favor of strong international sanctions, and both said they would use military power if necessary to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
Mr. Obama appeared to contradict himself at one point on Iran. He labeled “not true” a report in The New York Times that the United States and Iran have agreed in principle to direct talks on Iran’s nuclear program after the elections. But he later welcomed Mr. Romney for supposedly agreeing: “I’m pleased that you now are endorsing our policy of applying diplomatic pressure and potentially having bilateral discussions with the Iranians to end their nuclear program. But just a few years ago, you said that’s something you’d never do.”
.
The candidates arrived here as foreign policy, which had been a political asset for Mr. Obama, has gained importance lately, particularly after the attack that killed the American ambassador to Libya last month. Mr. Obama’s 10-point advantage in July on who would be a better commander in chief has shrunk to a three-point edge in the latest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll.
For all the attention to Libya at the second debate, the two men seemed to have exhausted the topic this time. There was no chatter over whether Mr. Obama had called it an act of terror, and Mr. Romney made only a couple of perfunctory references.
Instead, he tried to broaden his critique, praising the president’s counterterrorism efforts but quickly pivoting to call for a more comprehensive strategy to diminish radicalism in the Middle East. “I congratulate him on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in Al Qaeda,” Mr. Romney said, “but we can’t kill our way out of this mess.”
Mr. Obama countered sharply. Facing Mr. Romney directly, he said, “I have to tell you that your strategy previously has been one which has been all over the map,” a phrase he would use three times during the debate.
“My strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys,” Mr. Romney replied. “But my strategy is broader than that.” It is important to get the Muslim world to reject extremism, he added. “We don’t want another Iraq. We don’t want another Afghanistan.”
“My strategy is pretty straightforward, which is to go after the bad guys,” Mr. Romney replied. “But my strategy is broader than that.” It is important to get the Muslim world to reject extremism, he added. “We don’t want another Iraq. We don’t want another Afghanistan.”
The two men clashed over Mr. Romney’s call for the United States to arm the rebels in Syria. The president said that while “what we’re seeing happening in Syria is heartbreaking,” the United States should not arm the Syrian rebels until Americans could be sure they knew exactly whom they were dealing with.
The two men also clashed over Syria, China and Russia. Mr. Obama ridiculed Mr. Romney for saying Russia was America’s No. 1 one geopolitical foe. “The 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back,” the president said.
Pressed about whether he would go beyond what the administration was doing, Mr. Romney said his objective was to replace President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, and to put in place a government that would be more friendly to the United States. He was unclear about how he would accomplish that, saying the United States should take “a leading role” to find opposition leaders with whom it could have friendly ties.
Mr. Romney distinguished a “geopolitical” rival from a more pressing national security threat like Iran, but said he would not be naïve about Moscow. “I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin,” he said. Mr. Romney said Mr. Putin would not see more "flexibility" after the election, as the president was overheard telling another Russian leader. “After the election, he’ll get more backbone."
Mr. Obama replied: “What you’ve just heard Governor Romney say is that he doesn’t have different ideas.”
Mr. Romney sought to use the words of the Iranian leader, a hard-line Islamist who considers the United States the “Great Satan,” to give credence to his argument that the United States has become weak. “When the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says our debt makes us not a strong country, that’s a frightening thing,” Mr. Romney said.
He went on a lengthy soliloquy about American leadership in the world, and accused Mr. Obama of weakening the country.
The two also clashed over Russia and Mr. Obama’s policy of trying to “reset” the relationship with Moscow, an effort that has faltered since Vladimir V. Putin returned to the presidency this year.
Mr. Obama struck first, citing Mr. Romney’s assessment that Russia was America’s No. 1 one geopolitical foe as a relic of cold war thinking. “The 1980s, they’re now calling to ask for their foreign policy back,” the president said.
Mr. Romney distinguished a “geopolitical” rival from a more pressing national security threat like Iran, but said he would not be naïve about Moscow. “I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin,” he said. Noting Mr. Obama’s overheard remark to Mr. Putin’s predecessor that he would have more flexibility after the election, Mr. Romney said, “After the election, he’ll get more backbone.”
Because the format of this last debate echoed that of the vice-presidential debate, Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney were not roaming the stage, as they were in the last debate, or standing behind lecterns, as they did in the first debate. Rather, they sat side by side at a table before the moderator, Bob Schieffer of CBS News.
The seating did nothing to contain the testiness of the debate, which began as soon as the two men started talking. Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama interrupted each other time and again, with the president slicing the table with his hands to make his point. Mr. Romney sat stiffly, his hands before him, back ramrod. The two spoke for several minutes at a stretch without interruption by Mr. Schieffer.
The candidates repeatedly drifted toward domestic issues, often at the instigation of Mr. Romney, who suggested America’s own economic woes were undermining the nation’s ability to lead abroad.
The debate was competing for viewers against two high-profile sporting events, game seven of the National League Championship Series and “Monday Night Football.” The candidates arrived as Mr. Romney has erased the president’s lead nationally and even surged ahead in some polls, convincing many Republicans for the first time that he can win. Mr. Obama has been bolstered by more positive polls in key states, although even there his advantage has eroded.
The closeness of the race coupled with the deadly attack last month on the American diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, raised the stakes for a debate that at one point was considered something of an afterthought. With the economy still struggling and national debt on the rise, foreign policy has been a low priority for many voters, according to polls, but both candidates hoped to use their final showdown to undercut their rival’s credibility with voters on leadership and character.
Mr. Obama started the general election contest with foreign policy as a political asset. While Democrats in the past often struggled with the party’s weak-on-security reputation, Mr. Obama had a record of authorizing the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, wiping out many Al Qaeda figures through an aggressive drone war, and helping topple the Libyan government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.
But what was a strength has turned into more of a target for Republican attacks, particularly after the Libya assault that killed Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. The administration’s rejection of security requests before the attack and shifting assessments after it exposed Mr. Obama to criticism.
On the question of who would make a better commander in chief, Mr. Obama’s 10-point advantage in July has shrunk to a three-point edge in the latest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, with 44 percent picking him and 41 percent Mr. Romney.
Mr. Romney stumbled in his efforts to accelerate that shift during last week’s debate when he focused on the matter of when Mr. Obama first called the assault in Benghazi a terrorist attack. Mr. Obama parried by noting that he had referred to “acts of terror” in his first statement on the episode, which seemed to surprise Mr. Romney. The exchange overshadowed Mr. Obama’s failure to respond to a voter who asked why requests for additional security had been denied.
Republicans were determined to frame the issue better heading into Monday night. American Crossroads, a pro-Romney “super PAC,” released a video declaring that “today terrorists are on the rise” while showing pictures of unrest across the Middle East and tracking the administration’s changing statements about Benghazi. The Romney campaign also sent a blitz of e-mails accusing Mr. Obama of going soft on China, Iran and Russia.
The Obama campaign countered with a series of Web videos attacking Mr. Romney for statements like calling Russia the No. 1 geopolitical foe of the United States. Another video highlighted Mr. Obama’s efforts to end wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, implying Mr. Romney would continue them. Mr. Romney “offers nothing but endless bluster and a record of dangerous blunders,” Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, Mr. Obama’s partner during preparations for the debate, wrote in a memo.
The debate over Iran is, to a certain extent, a fight for the Jewish vote. Israel views Iran’s nuclear program as a threat to its existence. While Mr. Obama has vowed not to allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, Mr. Romney’s position has shifted from a more hawkish position to Mr. Obama’s position, and then back to statements that, as president, he would stop Iran from obtaining even the capability to make a nuclear weapon. Mr. Romney has also said he would not agree to any uranium enrichment for Iran, even though foreign-policy experts say such a concession will be necessary in any diplomatic deal.
Mr. Romney has accused Mr. Obama of allowing distance to appear between the United States and Israel; Mr. Obama has noted that his administration provided much of the Iron Dome missile defense system for Israel. In addition, for the last five years, the United States and Israel have worked closely on a major covert operation against Iran called Olympic Games, an effort to sabotage Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities with cyberattacks.
But Mr. Obama and Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have a chilly relationship, while Mr. Romney has gone out of his way to court Mr. Netanyahu, even at the expense of his relationship with Palestinians. A video captured Mr. Romney saying at a fund-raiser that he did not see any prospects for Palestinian statehood. He has since made a recommitment to the goal of a democratic Palestinian state side by side with Israel.
The fight for the Jewish vote has been an uphill struggle for Republicans, but Romney aides believe that if they can make a dent in the Democratic Party’s Jewish base in Florida, they can increase Mr. Romney’s chances in a crucial state.
With the end of the debates, Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney will embark on a two-week sprint to Election Day, concentrating on a handful states that may prove pivotal. Mr. Obama plans a 48-hour tour with stops in Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, Ohio and back here in Florida. Mr. Romney plans to head to Nevada, Colorado, Iowa and Ohio.
