Campaigns Can Be Unpredictable

VOLATILE FLASHPOINTS COULD FLARE UP, BECOMING MAJOR FACTORS IN PRESIDENTIAL RACE

There is wide agreement the economy and the nation’s financial condition top the list of public concerns.

However, when it comes to the presidential race, other factors come into play - as we have seen in the furor in the Middle East, set in motion by an obscure but grossly offensive Internet video.

The anti-American protests across parts of the Islamic world unexpectedly became an issue in the campaign.

Mitt Romney, who had already displayed a less-than-sure hand on foreign affairs, made ill-timed and ill-informed comments about attacks on U.S. diplomatic posts.

It appeared that he was trying to score political points, jumping out with a quick statement on a still-developing situation.

Subsequently, news broke the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans had been killed in the attack in Libya, but Romney stood by his initial comments.

Romney drew considerable criticism for his unstatesmanlikeposition. This came at time when the Romney campaign was already in a rough patch. The Romney campaign hoped to get a boost from the Republican convention and to get more traction on the economic issues. However, poor stage management, which gave prime-time to a bizarre Clint Eastwood performance and pushed Romney into the late evening, symbolized a campaign that needed sharper focus. Since that time there have been a series of bumps for Romney, including the controversial statement about the Middle East protests. Only 26 percent of Americans who said they were closely following the news approved of Romney’s response, according to the Pew Research Center, while 45 percent approved ofPresident Obama’s handling of the situation.

Romney’s problems over that statement were compounded by comments from some of his top neoconservative foreign policy advisers who suggested if Romney had been president, the Middle East protests would not have happened. The reality is angry mobs are not going to be any less angry if Romney is elected and will continue to be a problem regardless of who is the U.S.

president. The ongoing clash between traditionalism and modernization in the Middle East, the internal rivalries and the resistance to external influence are not going to fade away anytime soon.

There are, of course, legitimate foreign policy issues that should be discussed in the campaign.

On China, Israel-Iran, and Syria, the candidates have occasionally locked horns. However, although it may play well with some domestic constituencies, simply talking tough isn’t accomplishing much.

Further, there is little indication that the American people are eager for more military interventions, particularly in the aftermath of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nonetheless, there are volatile flashpoints that could flare up and become factors in the presidential race. It is fair to point out while Romney may have taken heat for his comments about the protests, the Middle East events also focused more attention on the Obama administration’s record in the region. And the Romney team saw an opportunity to re-emphasize its theme of Obama “weakness” internationally.

Obama entered oft ce vowing to improve U.S.

relations with the Islamic world and gave a highly advertised speech in Cairo intended to help open a new era. However, the Arab spring and signifi cant shifts in leadership in the region have created a new set of problems for American policy-makers. And while the blasphemous Internet video may have been a spark and a rallying point for protests, there are deep resentments and dissatisfaction that heighten instability and pose major diplomatic challenges.

These conditions could cause serious nightmares for Obama at almost any point.

Some Romney backers suggest a comparison between the current situation and 1979-80 when President Carter was dealing with a fl oundering economy and some international challenges, notably Iran and the hostage crisis. Although Carter, like Obama, had some signifi cant foreign policy achievements, he wasportrayed as weak in dealing with those problems and that helped open the way for Ronald Reagan’s election.

Democrats might prefer a comparison to 1948 when Harry Truman was not especially popular and the nation was experiencing some economic dift culties.

However, Truman ran a more eff ective campaign, attacking a “do-nothing” Congress, and convinced voters to stick with him instead of Thomas Dewey, a rather wooden candidate lacking broad appeal.

Neither comparison is a perfect analogy by any means, and we have been reminded that campaigns can take unexpected turns.

Debates, for example, could have signifi cant impact.

It is not unusual for campaigns to experience ups and downs and to be aff ected by unpredictable developments - whether they might be videos that suddenly emerge, including the one from the Romney private fundraiser, or foreign policy nightmares.

HOYT PURVIS IS A JOURNALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS PROFESSOR.

Opinion, Pages 11 on 09/23/2012

Upcoming Events