It has been said that actions speak louder than words. In the 2008 Presidential Campaign, the American people have chosen two very different candidates, one, a man of action with a questionable sense of humor, the other, a man who has deliberately avoided action throughout his brief political career, who relies instead on his gift of gab, at least in American English. What would be the difference, in terms of U.S. foreign policy, between these two men, should one of them become President?
Life lessons are learned through experience and can affect the way that an individual views and responds to the world around him. In this election, both candidates carry scars from incidents which occurred abroad. The Republican candidate is a former military prisoner of war, who endured conditions not sanctioned by the Geneva Convention, and who returned afterwards to a country which did not embrace veterans of this war. Rather than become embittered by this experience, he became a U.S. Senator. Since U.S. relations with the country it once at war with have changed dramatically, as both countries have sought to resolve issues of importance to individuals in both countries, it must be assumed that the Republican candidate has positively come to terms with his experience, the country in question, and the American public. Since his experience occurred in the Far East, it seems reasonable to assume that his foreign policy in the Far East would be non-aggressive, but defensive of American interests there.
The Democratic candidate was brought, as a child, following the departure of his biological father from his life, as part of a new family, to live in a foreign country in which he felt somewhat isolated, linguistically, socially, and religiously. At an age at which invisibility is desired, he had to learn to cope with his unique physical visibility, in a staunchly Muslim country with strange social customs. Even though he as not the only member of his family to whom this may have happened, as it may also have happened to his mother, he lacked an adult's coping mechanisms. It is reputed not to have been the happiest of times in his then young life, as there were too many problems for the young man to grapple with effectively, including the fact that he was part of a multi-ethnic household in a non-multi-ethnic society, which may explain why his family moved him to multi-ethnically embracing Hawaii. Since childhood traumas sometimes last longer than they should, it is not surprising that the Democratic candidate left the mostly Pacific-Far Eastern mixture of individuals in Hawaii, following his residence in Southeast Asia, as soon as he became an adult. As the son of a racially mixed marriage, without Pacific or Far Eastern roots, his childhodd experiences may have prompted him to become part of a less ethnically diverse group of individuals who resembled his absent father. He would then become both a Senator and the Democratic Presidential candidate.
Do effects of his childhood trauma still linger in the adult? Hawaii, residence of his youth, was deliberately avoided as a place to visit, by the Democratic candidate, early during the Presidential campaign. At a glance, it would seem that he has no desire to return to certain scenes of childhood unless able to enter them differently, perhaps with a power over certain locations that a child lacks. It is certain that he is knowledgeable that the original residents of Hawaii, from whom many of Hawaii's citizens are descended, represent the only real monarchy that existed in the now United States, making it a unique place. What foreign policy can be expected from him in the Far East? Based upon his action so far in the campaign, and through his experiences as a child, what may occur, in terms of policy may exhibit a return to a colonialism, an approach which the Far East, the United States, and the world has outgrown. His publicly stated approach to Russia echoes the refrain of 1961, the year of his birth, a time when colonialism still existed in the Far East, and which was an initial factor in the war in which the Republican candidate became a prisoner of war.
Prior to becoming a Presidential candidate, the only experience the Democratic candidate had abroad, as a Senator, were two trips, a brief one to the Ukraine, and a more extensive trip to visit the home country of his father. Although the trip to Kenya was advertised to constituents as one with stops in the Mid-East and other places in Africa, Kenya, where, according to the media, the Democratic candidate and his family were treated like royalty, was the real focus of the trip. In terms of experience abroad, the Democratic candidate's childhood residence in the Far East was of longer duration. It is likely, however, that the Democratic candidate will seek to strive for unification of tribes in Africa, or at least in Kenya, to avoid further bloodshed there, even if he is less interested in the same process in Iraq.
The Republican candidate has made many trips abroad as a member of Congress and the Senate Armed Services Committee, including eight trips to Iraq. It is known that he advocates continuation of the current strategy in Iraq in order to help establish a stable democracy there. Following a recent trip to Colombia, as an advocate of the U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement, which the Democratic candidate opposes, rebel forces in Colombia released U.S. and French hostages who had been held in captivity for years. The Republican candidate's foreign policy concerning countries in South America, including Colombia, may benefit U.S. ties to the region, even if opposed by the Democratic candidate.
Both candidates seek to woo heads of state in the European Union. It is assumed that attempts will be made by both candidates to work with members of the European Union to achieve an effective relationship with the United States.
In the end, actions of U.S. voters will determine U.S. foreign policy through selection of the candidate that they choose. Although most voters are more concerned with domestic issues, they should remember that they are members of the global community. Voters need to take the time to familiarize themselves with the world around them before casting their ballots in order to select a new President.